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 Texas

 Washington, DC 

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 

Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

State of Texas 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

American Battlefield Protection Program 

Washington, DC 

May 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) Kathleen Madigan and Matthew Borders, American Battlefield 

Protection Program 

Respondents Ed Cotham, Friends of Sabine Pass Battleground; Dwayne Jones, Denise 

Alexander, and Jami Durham, Galveston Historical Foundation; Rolando Garza and Doug 

Murphy, Palo Alto National Historical Park; Casey Edward Greene and Carol Wood, 

Rosenberg Library; Brett Cruse, Texas Historical Commission, Historic Sites Division; Bryan 

Winton, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge 

Cover: View of the Gulf of Mexico from Boca Chica Point at Palmito Ranch battlefield, 

Cameron County, Texas. Photo by Matthew Borders, 2008. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 

Table of Contents 

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

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

SYNOPSIS ........................................................................................................................ 5

METHOD STATEMENT ..................................................................................................... 7

RESEARCH AND FIELD SURVEYS ...................................................................................................... 7 

QUESTIONNAIRES ....................................................................................................................... 11 

SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS OF TEXAS’ CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELDS ............................ 12

QUANTIFIED LAND AREAS ........................................................................................................... 12 

CONDITION ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................................................... 12 

REGISTRATION ........................................................................................................................... 14

STEWARDSHIP ............................................................................................................................ 15 

PUBLIC ACCESS AND INTERPRETATION........................................................................................... 16 

LOCAL ADVOCACY ..................................................................................................................... 17 

INDIVIDUAL BATTLEFIELD PROFILES ........................................................................... 18

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 34

APPENDIX A. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELD PRESERVATION ACT OF 2002 ............................................... 34 

APPENDIX B. BATTLEFIELD QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................. 37 

APPENDIX C. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELD LAND ACQUISITION GRANTS ................................................ 40 

APPENDIX D. AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD PROTECTION PROGRAM PLANNING GRANTS .......................... 41 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 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 feesimple 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 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 FY2005 and FY2007. 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 Texas 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. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 4

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 5

Synopsis 

There are five CWSAC battlefields in the State of Texas. Historically, these battlefields 

encompassed more than 44,000 acres.1

 Today, only about 9,300 acres (21 percent) of these 

landscapes survive.2

 

In 1993, the CWSAC did not rank any of Texas’ battlefields as among the nation’s top 

priorities for preservation, but Palmito Ranch and Sabine Pass II were identified as 

battlefields where the potential for comprehensive landscape preservation did exist. 

Today, the Palmito Ranch battlefield retains much of its historic character, but Sabine 

Pass II has been greatly altered and fragmented. 

More than 5,400 acres of the Palmito Ranch battlefield are listed in the National Register 

of Historic Places (NRHP) and are designated as the Palmito Ranch Battlefield National 

Historic Landmark (NHL). The ABPP’s most recent survey indicates however, that more 

than 3,400 additional acres of the battlefield retain their historic character and could merit 

inclusion in the existing NRHP and National Historic Landmark areas. 

While much of the Palmito Ranch battlefield can still be preserved, opportunities for 

preservation are limited at Sabine Pass II due to the loss of many intact characterdefining landscape features. Although the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State do 

protect more than 400 acres of this battlefield at both the Texas Point National Wildlife 

Refuge and the Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site, the acreage is relatively 

small when compared to the full extent of the battlefield’s historic boundaries. Outside 

the refuge and state historical site, modern expansion of the shipping channel and 

industrialization along both sides of the pass have damaged the battlefield’s historic 

setting and features. 

When the CWSAC evaluated Sabine Pass I nearly two decades ago, it determined 

additional protection was needed. Since that time, other than the land protected by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the State, the terrain associated with the battlefield has been 

destroyed by the same development affecting Sabine Pass II. In both cases, there is little 

opportunity today for additional landscape preservation. 

Of Texas’s five Civil War battlefields, Galveston I and Galveston II have suffered the 

greatest degree of modern intrusion. The CWSAC determined these battlefields to be 

substantially fragmented. There is no protected land at these battlefields and the ABPP 

did not identify any additional acreage with historic integrity. Dredging has altered the 

shoreline and channel depth of Galveston’s inner harbor since the time of battle. This 

damage – extremely significant considering the role of naval forces in both battles – has 

been exacerbated by commercial, industrial, and residential development surrounding the 

port. Today, the Galveston I and Galveston II battlefields bear little resemblance to the 

landscape where the battles took place. 

Given that the majority of protected battlefield land in Texas has been conserved for its 

role as natural wildlife habitat and not for its historical significance, there is an intense 

need for long-range preservation planning and public-private efforts to protect what 

remains of the state’s Civil War landscape. In the past, Texas’ battlefields have not been 

 

1

Portions of the two Galveston battlefields overlap geographically, and the same is true of the two Sabine Pass battlefields. Using GIS, 

and accounting for overlapping areas, ABPP calculated that the Study Areas for the six battlefields in Texas represent 44,233.07 acres. 2

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

battlefields in Texas represent 9,315.08 acres. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 6

well represented by organized non-profit friends groups. The Friends of Sabine Pass 

Battleground – Texas’ only battlefield friends group – did not form until 2009. Future 

efforts to develop such an organization for the Palmito Ranch battlefield could help 

provide consistent, long-term support in the absence of, or in support of, federal and state 

action. In addition, the acquisition of protective easements should be considered as a 

means of protecting portions of the Palmito Ranch battlefield that are currently in 

private ownership. Although not previously utilized in Texas, this tool has been effective 

in several other states. 

Table 1 indicates how the CWSAC prioritized Texas’s Civil War battlefields in 1993. 

The National Park Service will issue updated priorities after all of the CWSAC battlefields 

nationwide have been surveyed and all state reports have been completed. 

Table 1. CWSAC Preservation Priorities from 1993 

 CWSAC Priority Battlefield County/City 

 I Critical Need N/A N/A 

 II Comprehensive Preservation Possible Palmito Ranch (TX005) 

Sabine Pass II (TX006) 

Cameron 

Jefferson 

 III Additional Protection Needed Sabine Pass I (TX001) Jefferson 

 IV Fragmented/Destroyed Galveston I (TX002) 

Galveston II (TX003) 

Galveston 

Galveston 

Figure 2. A substantial portion of the Palmito Ranch battlefield still retains its historic character 

and looks much the same as it did during the time of the battle. Photo by Kathleen Madigan, 2008
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 7

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 Texas battlefields in April 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 it 

surveyed in Texas (see Figure 3). 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.3

 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 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 these battlefields (see Table 2). The refined methodology resulted in changes 

in the size of Study Areas, Core Areas, or both at each of the CWSAC battlefields in Texas. 

However, it is important to note that the Study Area and Core Area boundaries are based 

on the review of historic source material, drawn to indicate where the battle took place, 

and convey only the location of the battlefield; neither takes the current condition nor 

alterations to the historic landscape into consideration. For this reason, they should not be 

used to define surviving portions of a battlefield that merit protection and preservation 

without further evaluation. 

 

3

 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 Texas 8

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 and after 

combat, and where they fought during 

combat. Historic accounts, terrain analysis, 

and feature identification inform the 

delineation of the Study Area boundary. 

Historic setting, approaches, and natural 

features that figure importantly in the battle 

are defining elements. 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 and protected. 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 direct 

engagement on the battlefield. Positions 

that delivered or received fire, and the space 

connecting 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 Area, 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. Although preparing a National Register 

nomination may require further assessment of 

historic integrity and more documentation 

than that provided by the ABPP survey, PotNR 

boundaries identify land that merits this 

additional effort. 

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 the landscape retained enough 

integrity to convey the significance of the 

historic battle. 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.4

 However, 

because the ABPP focuses only on areas of 

battle, the Program 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.

5

 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 

 

4

 For general guidance about integrity issues and National Register properties, see National Park Service, How to Apply the National 

Register Criteria for Evaluation (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, revised 1997). 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. 5

 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 Texas 9

significance.”6 While assessments of integrity are traditionally based on seven specific 

attributes – location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association – 

battlefields are unique cultural resources and require special evaluation. “Generally, the 

most important aspects of integrity for battlefields are location, setting, feeling and 

association,” and the most basic test for determining the integrity of any battlefield is to 

assess “whether a participant in the battle would recognize the property as it exists 

today.”7

 

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 historic resources and the landscape 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. 

The degree to which post-war development has altered and fragmented the historic 

landscape or destroyed historic features and viewsheds is critical when assessing integrity. 

Changes in traditional land use over time do not generally diminish a battlefield’s 

integrity. For example, landscapes that were farmland during the Civil War do not need to 

be in agricultural use today to be considered eligible for listing in the NRHP so long as the 

land retains its historic rural character. Similarly, natural changes in vegetation – woods 

growing out of historic farm fields, for example – do not necessarily lessen the landscape’s 

integrity. 

Some post-battle development is expected; slight or moderate change within the 

battlefield may not substantially diminish a battlefield’s integrity. A limited degree of 

residential, commercial, or industrial development is acceptable. These post-battle “noncontributing” elements are often included in the PotNR boundary in accordance with 

NRHP guidelines.8

Significant changes in land use since the Civil War do diminish the integrity of the 

battlefield landscape. Heavy residential, commercial, and industrial development; cellular 

tower and wind turbine installation; and large highway construction are common 

examples of such changes. Battlefield landscapes with these types of changes are 

generally considered as having little or no integrity. 

 

6

 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 40, 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), http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/NRB40.pdf. Archeological integrity was not examined during this 

study, but should be considered in future battlefield studies and formal nominations to the National Register. 7 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 40, 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). 

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 on their own merits.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 10

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), the 

ABPP did not assign a PotNR boundary.9

 

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 Table 2 for boundary comparisons.)10

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 

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 Act11 and 

Environmental Impact Statements/Environmental Assessments required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act.12 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. 

While a portion of the Palmito Ranch battlefield has been listed in the NRHP and 

designated as a NHL (see Table 4), the ABPP has identified a PotNR boundary that could 

guide efforts to expand existing registration boundaries. Based on the ABPP’s evaluation, 

more than 77 percent of the total Study Area at Palmito Ranch retains integrity. At 

Galveston I, Galveston II, Sabine Pass I, and Sabine Pass II, the ABPP believes the 

Study Areas of these battlefields no longer retain enough integrity to merit listing as 

battlefield landscapes. 

 

9

 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 40, Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating, and Registering America’s Historic 

Battlefields, 1992 , Revised 1999 (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." The ABPP interprets this latter guidance to mean all

military activities that influenced the battle. See the individual battlefield profiles for information about military actions taken 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. 10 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. 11 16 USC 470f. 

12 42 USC 4331-4332. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 11

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 carry out the Congressional 

directive for information about activities at the battlefields, 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 Texas, representatives from four organizations provided information. Their responses, 

combined with the survey findings, allowed the ABPP to create a profile of conditions and 

activities at Texas’s Civil War battlefields. 

Figure 4. The design of tee markers at the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course is similar to 

commemorative battlefield markers. Today, what remains of Fort Brown National Historic 

Landmark, the last extant defining feature of the Palmito Ranch battlefield in the city of 

Brownsville, is preserved on the golf course. Photo by Kathleen Madigan, 2008. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 12

Summary of Conditions of Texas’s Civil War Battlefields 

Quantified Land Areas 

Using a Geographic Information Systems program, 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 (NRHP) and that remains to be 

protected (Potential National Register boundary). 

As noted above, the Study Areas and Core Areas of Texas’ Civil War battlefields have been 

established in accordance with ABPP research and field survey methodology. Particular 

focus was paid to identifying the routes of approach and withdrawal associated with each 

battle, and to identifying areas of secondary action that influenced the course or outcome 

of the battles.13 The Study Area and Core Area boundaries established for each battlefield 

take these movements and actions into account, recognizing the extent to which theses 

ancillary areas facilitate greater understanding of the battle story. Please see the 

individual battlefield profiles at the end of this report for more information about the 

extent of and reasons for the established boundaries. 

Table 2. Battlefield Area Statistics 

   Battlefield Study Area Core Area PotNR 

Boundary

   Galveston I (TX002) 20,539.74 4,765.40 0.00

   Galveston II (TX003) 19,434.01 3,855.60 0.00

   Palmito Ranch (TX005) 11,696.30 3,744.78 8,964.71

   Sabine Pass I (TX001) 6,229.72 2,665.96 0.00

   Sabine Pass II (TX006) 6,489.15 3,377.22 0.00

Condition Assessments 

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

Area.

14 While no battlefield remains completely unaltered since the Civil War, the 

character-defining features of Palmito Ranch remain intact, and the landscape continues 

to reflect its association with the historic battle. Much of the battlefield has been 

protected within the boundaries of the Boca Chica Tract of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Lower Rio Grande River Valley National Wildlife Refuge. This land, which is 

bordered by the Rio Grande River in the south and stretches between Boca Chica Point in 

the east and the city of Brownsville in the west, retains a significant degree of historical 

integrity. In addition to the federal land, many privately owned ranches located within 

the Study Area remain relatively unchanged since the Civil War. 

 

13 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 40, Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating, and Registering America’s Historic 

Battlefields, 1992 , Revised 1999 (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. 14 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. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 13

Within the wildlife refuge, topographic features such as Palmito Hill, Tulosa Hill, and the 

Loma del la Jauia remain unaltered by incompatible land uses. Palmito Hill, located on the 

Old Palmito Ranch, is the site of greatest elevation in this very flat region and, as such, 

served as the focal point of action during the battle. While the hill survives, large 

industrial structures at the Port of Brownsville north of the wildlife refuge diminish the 

overall quality of the site’s integrity by damaging the historic viewshed. Tulosa Hill – an 

observation point and skirmish location located to the west of Palmito Hill on the Old 

Tulosa Ranch – and the Loma de la Jauia – a low ridge that served as a Confederate 

artillery position and the location from which the Confederate cavalry flanked the Union 

troops at Palmito Hill – retain good physical integrity. In addition, the routes of troop 

movement are relatively easy to identify based on the good condition of the topography 

and extant historic features. 

Outside the boundaries of the wildlife refuge, the Confederate approaches from 

Brownsville have been lost to urban encroachment. The Confederate headquarters at Fort 

Brown, located within the city of Brownsville, has also been destroyed with the exception 

of a section of the curtain wall and a redoubt preserved on a golf course. Fort Brown is a 

National Historic Landmark and the surviving portions are the only features of the battle 

of Palmito Ranch remaining in the City. 

The course of the Rio Grande has shifted significantly since the time of the battle. Because 

of this, the river cannot be used as a point of reference for identifying the location of 

battle events on the modern landscape. In addition, soil deposition has expanded the land 

mass of Boca Chica Point since 1865, altering the configuration of the landscape at the 

eastern end of the battlefield. 

Change appears to be slowly accelerating at the Palmito Ranch battlefield. Only flood 

plain separates the battlefield from the Port of Brownsville to the north. Any expansion of 

the port’s heavy industrial infrastructure represents a potential threat. In addition, 

residential and commercial development from the city of Brownsville is sprawling east 

toward the battlefield’s Core Areas. Finally, federal immigration control plans include 

construction of a barrier wall along the Rio Grande. This barrier, if implemented, will 

destroy the last remains of Fort Brown. 

Damage to the battlefield landscapes of Galveston I, Galveston II, Sabine Pass I, and 

Sabine Pass II has been more extensive. At Galveston I and Galveston II, some 

essential features, such as the channel between Galveston Island and Bolivar Point, have 

remained unchanged since the time of the battle. However, the shoreline of the inner 

harbor has been altered radically by dredging operations and commercial, industrial, and 

residential development around the port. In addition, open water between Duck Island 

and Pelican Spit has been filled to create a single land mass, now known as Pelican Island. 

At Sabine Pass I and Sabine Pass II, portions of the battlefield outside of the Sabine Pass 

Battleground Historical Site and the Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge have been 

altered beyond recognition. Slivers of battlefield land protected within the boundaries of 

the state owned historical site and federally owned national wildlife refuge do retain 

some integrity, but these areas are relatively small when compared to the full size of the 

battlefield Study Areas. The pass, although extant, is much deeper and wider than it was 

at the time of the battle. Fort Griffin, which was attacked during the battle of Sabine 

Pass II, has been destroyed and the Confederate-built oyster bed obstruction associated 

with that battle is gone. In addition, industrial development surrounds the site on both 

sides of the pass. This infrastructure has destroyed historic viewsheds associated with both 

battles of Sabine Pass, and future expansion of gas and oil refineries in the area will only 

continue to diminishing their integrity. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 14

Table 3: Condition Summary

Condition

 

Battlefield 

Land use is little changed (1) Palmito Ranch 

Portions of landscape have been altered, but most 

essential features remain (0)

 None

Much of the landscape has been altered and 

fragmented, leaving some essential features (0)

 None

Landscape and terrain have been altered beyond 

recognition (4)

 Galveston I, Galveston II 

Sabine Pass I, Sabine Pass II 

Battlefields that were not assessed (0) None

Registration 

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

listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Registered battlefields meet 

national standards for documentation, physical integrity, and demonstrable significance to 

the history of our 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 

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

for its preservation.15 

Land within the Palmito Ranch battlefield Study Area has already been listed in the NRHP and 

further designated as a NHL. The battlefield was recognized as a NHL in 1997, after the 

CWSAC’s study in the early 1990s, and includes 47 percent of the total battlefield Study Area.16 

The ABPP’s survey indicates that additional land, more than 3,400 acres, could merit addition to 

the existing NRHP and NHL boundaries. 

Table 4 compares the number of acres already designated or listed with the number of acres 

that are likely to meet the same criteria. No land directly associated with the battlefields of

Galveston I, Galveston II, Sabine Pass I, or Sabine Pass II has been listed in the NRHP or 

designated as a NHL. Given their poor integrity, the ABPP does not believe these battlefields 

meet the eligibility requirements of the NRHP. 

 

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

National Historic Landmarks, and listings in the National Register of Historic Places. Congress creates national park units. The 

Secretary of the Interior designates National Historic Landmarks (NHL) – 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 treated as listed in the National Register. 16 The existing NHL boundaries for Palmito Ranch total 6,451.66 acres, but only 5,490.73 acres of that land is included within the 

boundary of the ABPP’s Study Area. Over time, the course of the Rio Grande River has changed. While the NHL boundary is based

on the river’s current position, ABPP has set the boundary of its Study Area to correspond with the river’s position as it was in 1865 

during the battle of Palmito Ranch.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 15

Table 4. Acres Registered Compared with Acres Potentially 

Eligible to be Registered 

Battlefield Designation ABPP PotNR 

Acres 

Existing 

Registered 

Acres 

Acres 

Potentially 

Eligible to be 

Registerted

Galveston I (TX002) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Galveston II (TX003) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Palmito Ranch (TX005) NHL 8,964.71 5,490.73 3,473.98

Sabine Pass I (TX001) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sabine Pass II (TX006) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Stewardship

Civil War battlefield landscape preservation efforts in Texas have been limited, with the 

majority of protected terrain at Palmito Ranch, Sabine Pass I, and Sabine Pass II

conserved for the purpose of natural wildlife habitat conservation – not historic resource 

preservation. The State of Texas manages 576 acres of land on the Palmito Ranch

battlefield as part of Boca Chica State Park. Additionally the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

manages more than 5,600 acres of land at the Palmito Ranch battlefield as part of its 

Lower Rio Grande River Valley National Wildlife Refuge and more than 350 acres of land 

associated with the battles of Sabine Pass I and Sabine Pass II at the Texas Point 

National Wildlife Refuge. The only land protected for its role in the Civil War is the 58-

acre Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site, owned by the State and managed by 

the Texas Historical Commission. There is no protected land at Galveston I and 

Galveston II. 

The complementary method of easement purchase has not been used to supplement fee 

simple purchase of battlefield land. ABPP knows of no land or easement acquisition 

efforts made by non-profit groups since 1993. There are no unprotected, intact acres 

available for future preservation at Galveston I, Galveston II, Sabine Pass I, and 

Sabine Pass II. The loss of four of Texas’s five Civil War battlefields accentuates the need 

to protect – through fee simple purchase or the acquisition of protective easements – the 

nearly 2,700 acres of unprotected intact battlefield land that remains at Palmito Ranch. 

Table 5. Protective Stewardship of Intact Battlefield Land* 

 

Battlefield ABPP PotNR Acres Permanently 

Protected Acres 

Unprotected, 

Intact Acres 

Remaining 

 Galveston I (TX002) 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 Galveston II (TX003) 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 Palmito Ranch (TX005) 8,964.71 6,268.77 2,695.94 

 Sabine Pass I (TX001) 0.00 409.28 0.00 

 Sabine Pass II (TX006) 0.00 409.28 0.00 

 * 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 Texas 16

Public Access and Interpretation 

In its questionnaire, the ABPP asked battlefield stewards about the types of public access 

and interpretation available at each battlefield. The ABPP did not collect information 

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

exhibit was developed 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 indicate that all of Texas’s 

Civil War battlefields offer some degree of public interpretation, but none have a formal 

visitors center. Additional details regarding the interpretation activities undertaken at 

Galveston I, Galveston II, Palmito Ranch, Sabine Pass I, and Sabine Pass II are 

included within the “Individual Battlefield Profiles” section of this document. 

At Palmito Ranch, nearly 49 percent of the battlefield is publicly accessible within the 

Lower Rio Grande River Valley National Wildlife Refuge. More than six percent of the 

total battlefield Study Areas of both Sabine Pass I and Sabine Pass II are publically 

accessible within the boundaries of the Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge and the 

Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site. Because the battlefields are so highly 

fragmented, there is very little publically accessible land at Galveston I and Galveston II. 

Table 6: Interpretation Summary

 On-site Interpretation Battlefield

 Battlefields with public interpretation, including 

 visitors center (0) 

None

 Battlefields with public interpretation, but no 

 visitors center (5)

Galveston I (TX002) 

Galveston II (TX003) 

Palmito Ranch (TX005) 

Sabine Pass I (TX001) 

Sabine Pass II (TX006)

 Battlefields with no public interpretation (0) None 

Figure 5. nterpretive marker at Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site showing a reconstruction 

 of Fort Griffin, a defining feature of the battle of Sabine Pass II. Photo by Kathleen Madigan, 2008.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 17

Local Advocacy

 Nonprofit organizations play important roles in protecting historic battlefields. These 

organizations 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 public-private 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. 

Unfortunately Palmito Ranch battlefield does not have a nonprofit group to advocate for 

its preservation interests. The battles of Galveston I and Galveston II also do not have a 

nonprofit group dedicated soley to battlefield preservation, but the Galveston Historical 

Foundation does interpret the battles and preserve some associated structures. Only 

Sabine Pass I and Sabine Pass II benefit from the efforts of a private nonprofit group 

dedicated to the preservation of the battlefields. 

In 2009, the Friends of Sabine Pass Battleground was established to manage the Sabine 

Pass Battleground Historical Site in partnership with the Texas Historical Commission. 

Although this group has only been active for one year, it has begun to develop publicprivate partnerships in support of preservation and interpretation efforts at the Sabine 

Pass I and Sabine Pass II battlefields. 

While other organizations with more general historical interests may also play important 

roles in preserving Texas’s battlefields, the Friends of Sabine Pass Battleground is the only 

known local organization in Texas dedicated solely to the goals of Civil War battlefield 

preservation, interpretation, and promotion. 

Figure 6. In Galveston, historic structures such as the Hendley Building, associated with the battle 

of Galveston II, are intact. While some streets and buildings dating from the period of the battle 

remain, the battlefield landscape bears little resemblance to its historic appearance. Photo by 

Kathleen Madigan, 2008.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 18

Individual Battlefield Profiles

Battlefield Profile Glossary

Location County or city in which the battlefield is located. 

Campaign Name of military campaign of which the battle was part. Campaign 

 names are taken from The War of the Rebellion: a Compilation of 

 the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. 

 

Battle Date(s) Day or days upon which the battle took place, as determined by the 

 Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. 

Principal Commanders Ranking commanders of opposing forces during the battle. 

Forces Engaged Name or description of largest units engaged during the battle. 

Results Indicates battle victor or inconclusive outcome. 

Study Area Acreage determined by the ABPP to represent the full extent of land 

associated with the historic battle. 

Potential National Acreage of land that retains historic character and may be eligible for

Register Lands listing in the National Register of Historic Places (see Table 2). 

 

Protected Lands Estimated acreage (based on questionnaires and GIS) of battlefield 

land that is in public or private non-profit ownership, or is under 

permanent protective easement, and is managed specifically for 1) 

the purposes of maintaining the historic character of the landscape 

and for preventing future impairment or destruction of the landscape 

and historic features, or for 2) a conservation purpose and use 

compatible with the goals of historic landscape preservation. 

Publicly Accessible Estimated acreage (based on responses to questionnaires) 

Lands within the Study Area maintained for public visitation. 

 

Management Area Name of historic site, park, or other area maintained for battlefield 

resource protection and/or public visitation.

Friends Group(s) Name of local advocacy organization(s) that support preservation 

 activities at/for the battlefield. 

Preservation Indicates which types of preservation activities have taken place at 

Activities the battlefield since 1993 (based on responses to questionnaires). 

Since 1993 

 

Public Indicates which types of interpretation/educational activities have 

Interpretation taken place at the battlefield since 1993 (based on responses 

Since 1993 to questionnaires).

Condition Statement The ABPP’s assessment of the overall condition of the battlefield’s 

Study Area (based on field surveys and responses to questionnaires). 

Historical Designation Notes the most prestigious federal historical designation the 

battlefield has received (i.e. national park unit, National Historic 

Landmark, or National Register of Historic Places). 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 19

Galveston I (TX002) 

Location Galveston County 

Campaign Operations to Blockade the Texas Coast (1862-63) 

Battle Date(s) October 4, 1862 

Principal Commanders Commander William B. Renshaw [US]; Colonel Joseph J. Cook and 

Colonel Xavier B. Debray [CS] 

Forces Engaged Mortar Flotilla of the Western Gulf Blockading Squadron [US]; 

Garrison at Galveston [CS] 

Results Union Victory 

Study Area 20,539.74 acres 

The boundary includes areas of the harbor and shipping channel 

where Federal naval forces withdrew from battle to rejoin the main 

fleet blockading the port. The Core Area represents the full range of 

artillery bombardment between the Confederate land batteries on 

Galveston Island and the Union flotilla. 

Potential National 0.00 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 0.00 acres 

Publicly Accessible Lands 0.00 acres 

Management Area(s) None 

Friends Group(s) None

Preservation Activities Advocacy 

Since 1993 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories 

 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects 

 Land or Development Rights Purchased 

 Legislation 

 Planning Projects

 Research and Documentation 

Public Interpretation Brochure(s) 

Since 1993 Driving Tour 

 Living History 

 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

 Visitor Center 

 Walking Tour/Trails 

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs

 Website 

 Other 

Condition Statement Most of the landscape has been altered and fragmented, leaving 

few essential features. The channel between Galveston Island and 

Bolivar Point is essentially unchanged since the time of the battle, 

however the shoreline of the inner harbor has been altered 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 20

 considerably through both dredging operations and portside 

commercial, industrial, and residential development. In addition, 

open water between Duck Island and Pelican Spit has been filled 

to create a single land mass – Pelican Island. 

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 21
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 22

Galveston II (TX003) 

Location Galveston County 

Campaign Operations against Galveston (1862-1863) 

Battle Date(s) January 1, 1863 

Principal Commanders Colonel Isaac S. Burrell and Commander William B. Renshaw [US]; 

Major General John B. Magruder [CS] 

Forces Engaged Companies D, G, and I, 42nd Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry 

Regiment, and the Mortar Flotilla of the Western Gulf Blockading 

Squadron [US]; Department of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, 

and the Texas Marine Department [CS] 

Results Confederate Victory 

Study Area 19,434.01 acres 

 The revised boundary includes the addition of Confederate sea and 

land approach routes, and the Union route of retreat. The Core Area 

was lengthened to include Pelican Spit, a bar that was the location of 

Fort Jackson but that has since merged with Duck Island to become 

Pelican Island. 

Potential National 0.00 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 0.00 acres 

Publicly Accessible Lands 0.00 acres 

Management Area(s) None 

Friends Group(s) None

Preservation Activities Advocacy 

Since 1993 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories 

 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects 

 Land or Development Rights Purchased 

 Legislation 

 Planning Projects

 Research and Documentation 

Public Interpretation Brochure(s) 

Since 1993 Driving Tour 

 Living History 

 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

 Visitor Center 

 Walking Tour/Trails 

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs 

 Website 

 Other 

Condition Statement Most of the landscape has been altered and fragmented, leaving 

few essential features. The channel between Galveston Island and 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 23

 Bolivar Point is essentially unchanged since the time of the battle, 

 however, the shoreline of the inner harbor has been alterted 

considerably through both dredging operations and recent 

commercial, industrial, and residential development at the port. 

In addition, open water between Duck Island and Pelican Spit has 

been filled to create a single land mass – Pelican Island. 

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 24
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 25

Palmito Ranch (TX005) 

Location Cameron County 

Campaign Expedition from Brazos Santiago (1865) 

Battle Date(s) May 12-13, 1865 

Principal Commanders Colonel Theodore H. Barrett [US]; Colonel John S. "Rip" Ford [CS] 

Forces Engaged Detachments from the 62nd U.S. Colored Infantry Regiment, 2nd 

Texas Cavalry Regiment, and 34th Indiana Volunteer Infantry [US]; 

Detachments from Gidding’s Regiment, Anderson’s Battalion of 

Cavalry, and other Confederate units and southern sympathizers 

[CS] 

Results Confederate victory 

Study Area 11,696.30 acres 

The revised Study Area boundary has been modified to follow the 

historic course of the Rio Grande from Brownsville to Boca Chica 

Point. The Study Area also includes Confederate and Union activity 

along the historic road connecting Brownsville and Boca Chica Point 

(the Boca Chica Highway). The Core Area was revised to conform to 

the historic course of the Rio Grande River, and was expanded to the 

north to include the Confederate flanking movement around the 

Loma de la Jauja ridge.

Potential National 8,964.71 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 5,703.56 acres 

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, fee simple 

Publicly Accessible Lands 5,703.56 acres 

 Lower Rio Grande River Valley National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service 

 

Management Area(s) Lower Rio Grande River Valley National Wildlife Refuge 

 

Friends Group(s) None

Preservation Activities Advocacy

Since 1993 9 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories 

 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects 

Land or Development Rights Purchased 

 Legislation 

 Planning Projects 

9 Research and Documentation

 Other 

Public Interpretation 9 Brochure(s) 

Since 1993 Driving Tour 

 Living History 

9 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

 Visitor Center 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 26

 Walking Tour/Trails 

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs 

 Website 

 Other 

Condition Statement Land use is little changed since the period of significance, with a 

large portion of the Palmito Ranch battlefield protected within 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s Lower Rio Grande River Valley National 

Wildlife Refuge bordering the Rio Grande River. This federal land, 

along with some privately owned ranches, retains historic 

integrity. Character defining features such as Palmito Hill (focal 

point of the battle), Tulosa Hill (skirmish site and observation 

point), and the Loma de la Jauia ridge (Confederate artillery 

position) are extant. The Rio Grande cannot be considered among 

these intact features – its course has altered since the time of the 

battle. Large industrial complexes at the Port of Brownsville 

disrupt the historic viewshed north of the battlefield. 

Encroachment from the city has destroyed part of the Confederate 

approach. Further development east of Brownsville will continue 

to threaten the battlefield. The Confederate headquarters at Fort 

Brown has been destroyed, with the exception of a section of the 

curtain wall and a redoubt, by the construction of a golf course 

and a levee. Fort Brown is a National Historic Landmark and the 

only feature of the battle of Palmito Ranch remaining in 

Brownsville. Federal immigration control plans include 

construction of a barrier wall along the Rio Grande which, if 

implemented, will destroy the last remains of Fort Brown. 

Historical Designation National Historic Landmark (Palmito Ranch Battlefield, 1997) 

 National Register of Historic Places (Palmito Ranch Battlefield, 

 1993) 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 27
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 28

Sabine Pass I (TX001) 

Location Jefferson County 

Campaign Operations to Blockade the Texas Coast (1862-63) 

Battle Date(s) September 24-25, 1862 

Principal Commanders Acting Master Frederick Crocker [US]; Major J.S. Irvine [CS] 

Forces Engaged Flotilla of the Western Gulf Blockading Squadron [US]; 

 Garrison at Sabine Pass [CS] 

Results Union victory 

Study Area 6,229.72 acres 

The revised boundary has been reduced to remove portions of the 

1993 Study Area that included lands within Texas Point National 

Wildlife Refuge that were not historically associated with the battle of 

Sabine Pass I. The Core Area has been narrowed, but also lengthened, 

to include portions of the sand bar affected by long-range 

bombardment during the battle.

Potential National 0.00 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 409.28 acres 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 351.28 acres, fee simple 

Texas Historical Commission, 58.00 acres, fee simple 

 

Publicly Accessible Lands 409.28 acres 

Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

351.28 acres 

Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site, Texas Historical 

Commission, 58.00 acres 

Management Area(s) Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site 

Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge 

Friends Group(s) Friends of Sabine Pass Battleground (2009)

Preservation Activities Advocacy

Since 1993 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories 

 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects 

Land or Development Rights Purchased 

 Legislation 

 Planning Projects 

9 Research and Documentation 

Public Interpretation Brochure(s)

Since 1993 Driving Tour

 Living History 

9 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

 Visitor Center 

9 Walking Tour/Trails 

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs 

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 29

9 Website 

 http://www.visitsabinepassbattleground.com

9 Other 

 Kiosk

Condition Statement Much of the landscape has been altered and fragmented, leaving 

some essential features. Slivers of the battlefield, protected 

within the boundaries of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Texas Point 

Wildlife Refuge and the state-owned Sabine Pass Battleground 

Historical Site, retain integrity. However, these areas are small 

compared to the full size of the battlefield’s Study Area. They do 

little to convey the scope of the battlefield’s historic boundaries 

and setting. The pass survives, but its channel has been dredged 

deeper and wider than it was at the time of the battle. Industrial 

development surrounds the site on both sides of the pass, and has 

destroyed historic viewsheds. Future expansion of gas and oil 

refineries in the area will diminish the site’s integrity further and 

continue to threaten what little remains of the battlefield. 

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 30
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 31

Sabine Pass II (TX006) 

Location Jefferson County 

Campaign Operations to Blockade the Texas Coast (1863) 

Battle Date(s) September 8, 1863 

Principal Commanders Major General William B. Franklin and Captain Frederick Crocker 

[US]; Lieutenant Richard W. Dowling [CS] 

Forces Engaged Flotilla of the Western Gulf Blockading Squadron and 150 

 Army sharpshooters [US]; Garrison of Fort Griffon (Texan Davis 

 Guards) [CS] 

Results Confederate victory 

Study Area 6,489.15 acres 

 The boundary has been reduced to include only areas of historical 

significance. The 1993 Study Area included portions of the Texas 

Point National Wildlife Refuge that were not historically associated 

with the battle of Sabine Pass II.

Potential National 0.00 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 409.28 acres 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 351.28 acres, fee simple 

Texas Historical Commission, 58.00 acres, fee simple

Publicly Accessible Lands 409.28 acres 

Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

351.28 acres 

Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site, Texas Historical 

Commission, 58.00 acres 

 

Management Area(s) Sabine Pass Battleground State Historical Site 

Texas Point National Wildlife Refuge 

Friends Group(s) Friends of Sabine Pass Battleground (2009)

Preservation Activities Advocacy

Since 1993 9 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories

 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects 

Land or Development Rights Purchased 

 Legislation 

 Planning Projects 

9 Research and Documentation 

9 Other 

Historic Monument Restoration

Public Interpretation Brochure(s)

Since 1993 Driving Tour

 Living History 

9 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

 Visitor Center 

9 Walking Tour/Trails 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 32

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs 

9 Website 

 http://www.visitsabinepassbattleground.com

9 Other 

 Kiosk

Condition Statement Much of the landscape has been altered and fragmented, leaving 

some essential features. Slivers of the battlefield, protected 

within the boundaries of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Texas Point 

Wildlife Refuge and the state-owned Sabine Pass Battleground 

Historical Site, retain integrity. Although part of Fort Griffin's 

outer earthworks remain at the Historical Site, and Sabine Pass 

itself is extant, most of Fort Griffin was destroyed by expansion of 

the channel. Modern engineering has dredged the channel 

deeper and wider than it was at the time of battle. In addition, 

the Confederate-built oyster bed obstruction, designed to prevent 

Union ships from traveling up the channel, is gone. 

Industrial development surrounds the site on both sides of the 

pass, and has destroyed historic viewsheds. Future expansion of 

gas and oil refineries in the area will diminish the site’s integrity 

further and continue to threaten what little remains of the 

battlefield. 

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

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 33
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 34

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))-- 

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

 ``appropriations''; and 

 (B) by striking ``section'' and inserting 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 35

 ``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. 

 ``(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 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 36

 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 Texas 37

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.) 

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 Texas 38

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 Texas 39

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 

a. To support program activities? 

b. 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 Texas 40

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 15,550.00 acres at 62 Civil War battlefields in 14 states. To date, 

no CWBLAG monies have been used in Texas. Given the remarkable success of battlefield 

land and easement acquisition in other states, these grants can help protect historic lands 

at Palmito Ranch in the future. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of Texas 41

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 $104,175.00 to 

Texas’s Civil War battlefields. 

Grantee Year Project Title Award

 

Brownsville Community 

Foundation 2000 Palmito Ranch Battlefield Core 

Area Identification Project 

$22,200.00

 

Friends of the Texas Historical 

Commission 2009 The Last Battle: Inventory of 

Palmito Ranch Battlefield 

$20,285.00

2005 Defining the Battle of Sabine 

Pass 

$46,690.00

 

1997 The Civil War in Texas, Official 

Guide and Map 

$15,000.00

 

Total $104,175.00