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 

FFaarrWWeesstteerrnnBBaattttlleeffiieellddss::

SSttaatteessooffCCoolloorraaddoo,,IIddaahhoo,,aannddNNeewwMMeexxiiccoo

 Washington, DC 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico

Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

American Battlefield Protection Program 

Washington, DC 

July 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, Paul Hawke, and January Ruck, Reporting; Matthew Borders, Historian; 

Kristie Kendall, Program Assistant 

Battlefield Surveyor(s) Kathleen Madigan and Matthew Borders, American Battlefield 

Protection Program 

Respondents Kathy Billings, Pecos National Historic Site; Jeff Hanson, Bureau of 

Reclamation; Signa Larralde, Bureau of Land Management; Alden Miller, Sand Creek 

Massacre National Historic Site; Brenda Wilkenson, Bureau of Land Management 

Cover: The volcanic escarpment of Mesa de la Contadera, also known as Black Mesa, is 

one of the primary defining features of the Valverde battlefield in New Mexico. 

Photograph by Matthew Borders, 2009. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico

Table of Contents 

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

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

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

METHOD STATEMENT ..................................................................................................... 8

RESEARCH AND FIELD SURVEYS ...................................................................................................... 8 

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

SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS OF CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELDS IN THE FAR WEST ........... 13

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

CONDITION ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................................................... 13 

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

STEWARDSHIP ............................................................................................................................ 16 

PUBLIC ACCESS AND INTERPRETATION........................................................................................... 17 

LOCAL ADVOCACY ..................................................................................................................... 18 

INDIVIDUAL BATTLEFIELD PROFILES ........................................................................... 19

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 32

APPENDIX A. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELD PRESERVATION ACT OF 2002 ............................................... 32 

APPENDIX B. BATTLEFIELD QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................. 35 

APPENDIX C. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELD LAND ACQUISITION GRANTS ................................................ 38 

APPENDIX D. AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD PROTECTION PROGRAM PLANNING GRANTS .......................... 39 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 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 the Far Western States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 4

Figure 1. Sand 

Creek Massacre 

is the only 

CWSAC 

battlefield in 

Colorado. 

Figure 2. Bear 

River Massacre is 

the only CWSAC 

battlefield in 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 5

Figure 3. 

Valverde and 

Glorieta Pass are 

the two CWSAC 

battlefields in 

New Mexico 

Figure 4. Modern 

road intrusions, such 

as US 50/66 in the 

Pigeon Ranch core 

area of Glorieta 

Pass, New Mexico, 

are both a 

preservation and 

interpretive 

challenge for this 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 6

Synopsis

There are four Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC) battlefields in the Far West. 

These four battlefields, in three states, are being reported on together because they 

represent resources isolated by geography and military campaign (type). Together they 

illustrate the preservation activities and needs of the Far West since the CWSAC initial 

report in 1993. They are Sand Creek Massacre in Colorado, Bear River Massacre in 

Idaho, and Valverde and Glorieta Pass in New Mexico. Historically, these battlefields 

encompassed more than 84,000 acres.1

 Today, large portions of the historic landscapes 

associated with these battles, about 74,000 acres (88 percent), retain their historic 

character.2

 

In 1993, 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. The CWSAC ranked Glorieta Pass among the nation’s top priorities for 

preservation. The rural sites of Valverde and Sand Creek Massacre were identified as 

battlefields that had the potential for comprehensive landscape preservation. Bear River 

Massacre was identified as a battlefield needing additional protection, the third tier of 

preservation priorities. Today, all four battlefields are good candidates for landscape 

preservation and protection. 

Table 1: CWSAC Preservation Priorities from 1993

 CWSAC Priority Battlefield County 

 I Critical Need Glorieta Pass (NM002) Santa Fe 

 II Comprehensive Preservation 

 Possible

Sand Creek (CO001)

Valverde (NM001) 

San Miguel

Kiowa 

 III Additional Protection Needed Bear River (ID001) Franklin 

 IV Fragmented/Destroyed None 

In 2009, the American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) survey found that Glorieta 

Pass still maintained much of its integrity, as the landscape has only been moderately 

altered since the time of the battle. The USDA Forest Service owns more than 3,500 acres 

and the National Park Service (NPS) more than 1,360 acres of the battlefield. Since 1993, 

there has been steady growth towards the battlefield along the Interstate 25 corridor east 

of Santa Fe, as commuters move to the more inexpensive outskirts of the city. In addition, 

funneling of the major transportation routes, I-25, US 50/66, and the Burlington Northern 

and Santa Fe Railroad, through the Pass and canyons associated with the battle has 

created a preservation and interpretation challenge both for lands protected by the NPS 

and for unprotected portions of the Study Area. The State has considered ways to 

mitigate the impact of some of the roads and is exploring the possibility of rerouting 

traffic on US 50/66 to avoid the battlefield. At the same time, they are also considering 

widening I-25 and have been in discussions with the NPS about the affects this would have 

on the landscape. Potential highway expansion, traffic use, and increasing development 

 

1

Using GIS software, the ABPP calculated that the Study Areas for the four battlefields in the Far West represent 84,814.59 acres. 2

 Using GIS software, the ABPP calculated that the Potential National Register Boundaries for the four battlefields in the Far West 

represent 74,552.53 acres. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 7

pressure make Glorieta Pass the most threatened of the four Far Western Civil War 

battlefields. 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the State of New Mexico’s Elephant Butte 

State Park protect nearly 11,000 acres of land on the Valverde battlefield. Only 148 acres 

at the BLM-managed Fort Craig National Historic Site, however, are held for the purpose 

of protecting and preserving the battlefield lands in perpetuity. The remainder of the 

publically held land is not managed for the preservation of the battlfield landscape and 

does not meet the definition of “protected” for the purposes of this report. The 

additional acreage in the Study area, approximately 24,500 acres, is in private ownership. 

Sand Creek Massacre and Bear River Massacre are the least threatened of the four 

CWSAC Far Western battlefields. These battlefields maintain a high degree of integrity. 

The greatest threats to the two landscapes are from modern use and changes in the 

historic watercourses. The streams have either changed course naturally or been 

channeled into canals which have altered the historic appearance of the landscape. Both 

Sand Creek Massacre and Bear River Massacre battlefields are also subject to the 

impacts of modern ranching and farming. Livestock grazing has damaged the soils, 

allowing for erosion and potential exposure of archeological resources. 

Figures 5 & 6: Salt Cedar infestation at Valverde Battlefield, New Mexico. Salt cedar is an invasive 

plant that grows so thickly it can obscure battlefield features (right). The only practical removal 

technique involves cutting, poisoning, and burning; all potentially harmful to the landscape (left). 

In the rural settings of the western battlefields, natural elements are one of the primary threats to 

the historic landscape. Photograph by Kathleen Madigan, 2009.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 8

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 site 

surveys of each battlefield and 2) prepared and sent out questionnaires to battlefield 

managers and advocacy organizations (see Appendix B). 

Research and Field Surveys 

The ABPP conducted the field assessments of these battlefields in May 2009. 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 of the principal battlefields 

surveyed (see Figure 7 for definitions). The CWSAC boundaries have proven invaluable as 

guides to local land and resource preservation efforts at Civil War battlefields. Since 1993, 

the National Park Service has refined its battlefield survey techniques, 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.4

Using its refined methodology, 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). At each of the battlefields, the refined 

methodology resulted in significant increases to the sizes of the Study Area and Core Area. 

It is important to note, however, that the Study Area and Core Area boundaries are based 

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

and convey only the location of the battlefield, neither takes the current condition or 

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). 4

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 9

Figure 7: 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 7).

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.5

 

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.

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, 

 

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). 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 of Historic Places and 36 CFR 63 for 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 10

is “the ability of a property to convey its significance.”7 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.”8

 

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.9

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 

 

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), 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 of Historic Places. 8 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). 

9

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 11

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

generally considered as having little or no integrity. 

The PotNR 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.10 

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 4.)11

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

research needed for a formal NRHP nomination. PotNR 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 Act 12 and 

Environmental Impact Statements/Environmental Assessments required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act.13 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. 

Portions of the Glorieta Pass and Bear River Massacre battlefields have been 

designated as NHLs and a large portion of Sand Creek is listed in the NRHP (see Table 4). 

The ABPP has identified PotNR boundaries that could guide efforts to expand existing NHL 

and NRHP boundaries at these battlefields. At Valverde, the 148 acre Fort Craig National 

Historic Site is listed in the NRHP, however, no known efforts have been undertaken to list 

Valverde’s additional 35,284 acres as a battlefield landscape.

 

10 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. 11 The ABPP’s surveys and PotNR assessments do not constitute formal action on behalf of the office 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. 

12 16 USC 470f. 

13 42 USC 4331-4332.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 12

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 Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico, representatives from five organizations completed 

and returned the questionnaires. Their responses, combined with the survey findings, 

allowed the ABPP to create a profile of conditions and activities at the four Civil War 

battlefields in the Far West. 

 Figure 8. Remains of 

the curtain wall at 

Bent’s New Fort, the 

point from which US 

troop left for Sand 

Creek, Colorado. 

The site of the fort is 

privately owned. 

Matthew Borders, 

2009. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 13

Summary of Conditions of Civil War Battlefields in the Far West 

Quantified Land Areas 

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

protected (Potential National Register boundary). 

As noted above and as Table 2 illustrates, the Study Areas and Core Areas of the Civil War 

battlefields in Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico have been established in accordance with 

ABPP research and field survey methodology. Particular attention 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.14 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 serve as battlefield features. 

Please see the individual battlefield profiles 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 

 Sand Creek (CO001) 34,387.61 2,271.97 27,027.45 

 Bear River (ID001) 2,000.00 448.48 2,000.00 

 Valverde (NM001) 35,432.92 6,888.07 32,922.45 

 Glorieta Pass (NM002) 12,994.06 992.36 12,602.63 

 

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, all four of the 

CWSAC battlefields in the Far West have suffered little alteration to their characterdefining features. These battlefields are open rural landscapes used primarily for ranching 

and farming. The National Park Service protects portions of two of the battlefields, Sand 

Creek Massacre and Glorieta Pass. Threats such as looting, natural elements, and 

incompatible use, however, may limit the protection of historic resources on other federal, 

state, and privately owned land at all four battlefields. 

Natural processes of stream erosion, river course changes, invasive plant infestation, and 

archeological looting affect all four Far Western battlefields. To date, the threats have not 

 

14 National Register of Historic Places 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." 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.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 14

seriously compromised the integrity of the battlefields. Nevertheless, if left unchecked, 

these threats will lead to degradation of the battlefield landscape. 

The landscape at Sand Creek Massacre is in good condition with only limited intrusions 

since the 1864 massacre. The greatest threat to the site is erosion caused by wind and 

water, particularly along the ridgeline and sandpits on which US troops stood and the 

Cheyenne and Arapaho attempted to hide themselves from attack. This natural erosion is 

exacerbated by cattle grazing on lands near the old Sand Creek bed and massacre site. An 

historic dike, which has since been abandoned, has caused some damage to the landscape 

in the northern portion of the battlefield and there are several ranch roads that were not 

present at the time of the massacre. Because the landscape as a whole is so little changed 

since the period of significance, the battlefield retains a high level of integrity. 

Bear River Massacre site retains a high degree of integrity. The wide-open vista, rising 

heights, and most of the historic defining features of the battlefield are easy to interpret. 

With the exception of limited intursions, the landscape has changed little since the time of 

the massacre. In 1898 the West Cache Canal was dug along the massacre site and 

Shoshone encampment, rebuilt after a flood in 1911, and is still in use today. Several 

landslides in the canyon on the northwest side of the Study Area have covered the 

massacre site and U.S. Route 91 bisects the battlefield. The majority of the Bear River

Massacre landscape is in private land holdings, most of which are either ranches or 

residences. The Shoshone Nation also owns a portion of the battlefield, which it uses for 

both interpretation and memorial purposes. 

The Valverde battlefield on both sides of the Rio Grande is in private and public 

ownership. While portions of the battlefield landscape have been altered, most essential 

features remain and the majority of the Study Area retains good integrity. The landscape 

is very rural and isolated, but its topography in the northern section has been impacted by 

both environmental changes and land use. The exact position of the Valverde fords, 

around which the bulk of the fighting occurred, cannot be located at this time. Shifting of 

the Rio Grande over the past 146 years has caused more than twenty feet of silt to settle in 

the area where the fords are believed to have been located. This, along with a dense 

growth of invasive salt cedar trees, has altered the battlefield landscape. The Burlington 

Northern and Santa Fe railroad and several Bureau of Reclamation canals further affect 

the northern portion of the Study Area. The site of Fort Craig, approximately five miles 

south of the fords’ approximate locations, is managed by the Bureau of Land Management 

as a National Historic Site. Currently Valverde is the only one of the four Far Western 

battlefields not listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). A comprehensive 

preservation plan to include listing in the NRHP and accommodation of future land use by 

privately owned ranches and government agencies should be the focus of preservation 

efforts to preserve this important landscape. 

Currently, the condition of the Glorieta Pass battlefield is good. While portions of the 

battlefield landscape have been altered, most essential features remain. Pecos National 

Historical Park protects portions of the battlefield, as does the USDA Forest Service. The 

remaining lands are privately owned. Glorietta Pass and the canyon in the 

Cañoncito/Johnson’s Ranch area have been impacted by the construction of Interstate 25, 

which is currently under consideration for widening. The Apache Creek area has been 

slightly altered by the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe railroad whose berm has covered 

part of the original battle site, and the Pigeon Ranch area is being affected by increasing 

traffic use on US 50/66. There has also been steady growth towards the battlefield along 

the Interstate 25 corridor east of Santa Fe, as commuters move to the more inexpensive 

outskirts of the city. Potential highway expansion, traffic use, and increasing development 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 15

pressure, particularly through the two Core Areas, make Glorieta Pass the most 

threatened of the four Far Western Civil War battlefields. Opportunities exist for public 

and private preservation partnerships to counter these threats and should be the focus of 

future preservation efforts. 

Table 3: Condition Summary 

Condition Battlefield 

 Land use is little Changed (3) Sand Creek (CO001) 

Bear River (ID001) 

 Portions of landscape have been altered, but most 

essential features remain (1) 

Glorieta Pass (NM002)

Valverde (NM001) 

 Much of the landscape has been altered and

fragmented, leaving some essential features (0) 

None

 Landscape and terrain have been altered beyond 

recognition (0) 

None

 Battlefields that were not assessed None

Registration 

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

listing in the 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 

Lands within the Bear River and Glorieta Pass battlefield Study Areas have already been 

listed in the NRHP and further honored with designation as National Historic Landmarks 

(NHLs). Sand Creek is listed in the NRHP. Within Valverde battlefield, Fort Craig and its 

surrounding landscape is listed in the NRHP. Table 4 compares the number of acres 

already registered (listed) with the number of acres that are likely to meet the same 

criteria, but are not currently part of an existing NHL or NRHP boundary. Given the good 

integrity of these battlefields, the ABPP believes there exists an excellent opportunity to 

expand the boundaries of the three previously listed battlefields and to list the battlefield 

landscape at Valverde. 

 

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 listed in the National Register of Historic Places. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 16

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

Sand Creek (CO001) NRHP & NPS 27,027.45 7,360.16 19,667.29

Bear River (ID001) NHL 2,000.00 1,791.06 208.94

Glorieta Pass (NM002) NHL & NPS 12,602.63 1,627.35 10,975.28

Valverde (NM001) NRHP* 32,922.45 148.72 32,773.73

Totals 74,552.53 10,927.29 63,625.24

* The NRHP designation for Valverde is for Fort Craig, a battlefield-defining feature, and not for the 

battlefield landscape. 

Stewardship

For the purposes of this update, public lands managed as historic sites in order to preserve 

the battlefield resources are considered protected. Other public land, not managed for the 

preservation of the battlefield landscape, still has potential for damaging threats. The 

land is subject to state and federal preservation law, preventing private development, but 

its primary use may not be compatible with preservation of the battlefield landscape. It 

may also be threatened by natural processes. 

At the Far Western battlefields, a total of 3,927 acres (five percent of the total Study 

Areas) are preserved and protected as battlefield landscapes. The remaining 95% of the 

battlefields are in either private unprotected ownership or managed by state and federal 

agencies for purposes other than battlefield preservation. 

The National Park Service owns land at both Sand Creek Massacre and Glorieta Pass, 

providing protective ownership for a portion of these battlefields. At Sand Creek 

Massacre, the NPS holds 2,385 acres (seven percent of the Study Area) as the Sand Creek 

Massacre National Historic Site and 1,364 acres of Glorieta Pass (10% of the Study Area) 

as part of Pecos National Historical Site. The Bureau of Land Management manages 148 

acres at Valverde (less than 1% of the Study Area) as Fort Craig National Historic Site. At

Bear River Massacre, the Shoshone Tribe owns 26 acres (one percent of the Study Area) 

for the purpose of interpretation and memorialization. 

Two of the battlefields also contain other public lands not managed for the preservation 

of the battlefield landscape, but still providing a level of protection. At Glorieta Pass, 

more than 3,500 acres are owned by the USDA Forest Service as part of the Santa Fe 

National Forest and The State of Colorado manages approximately 3 acres at Queen’s State 

Wildlife Area. At Valverde, the Bureau of Land Management owns 1,575 acres and the 

State of New Mexico manages more than 9,345 acres at Elephant Butte Lake State Park. 

Each of the Far Western battlefields could benefit from comprehensive planning to help 

guide coordination among public owners, private non-profits, and private landowners. 

Because so much of the battlefield landscape is in good condition there exists an excellent 

opportunity for additional preservation measures such as land acquisition, fee simple 

ownership, or easement purchases. Easements in particular provide protection without 

burdening the holder with obligations associated with fee simple ownership while 

compensating owners who relinquish the development rights of their property with tax 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 17

Table 5. Protective Stewardship of Intact Battlefield Land*

  

Battlefield ABPP PotNR 

Acres

Permanently 

Protected Acres

Unprotected, 

Intact Acres 

Remaining

   Sand Creek (CO001) 27,027.45 2,388.62 24,638.83 

   Valverde (NM001) 32,922.45 148.72 32,774.45 

   Glorieta Pass (NM002) 12,602.63 1,363.85 11,238.63 

   Bear River (ID001) 2,000.00 26.00 1,974.00 

Totals 74,552.53 3,927.19 70,625.91

   * For details, see each site's Individual Battlefield Profile   

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 

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 the Far 

Western battlefields offer some degree of public access and interpretation. Bear River 

Massacre site has both a pull off with an historic monument and signs and an overlook 

with interpretive panels. At Glorieta Pass, and Valverde, NPS and BLM provide visitors 

centers, walking trails, brochures, and interpretive signs. 

There is currently limited interpretation at Sand Creek Massacre as the National Park 

Service has only recently acquired lands associated with this site. At this time, there is a 

small visitors center, several interpretive signs, an historic monument, and a short walking 

trail. There is also a repatriation plot that allows American Indian remains to be placed 

back in earth sacred to the Cheyenne and Arapaho. 

Additional details regarding the interpretation activities undertaken at the four 

battlefields can be found in the Individual Battlefield Profiles section of this report. 

Table 6. Interpretation Summary* 

 On-site Interpretation Battlefield 

 

Battlefields with public interpretation, 

including visitors center (3) 

Sand Creek (CO001), Valverde (NM001), 

Glorieta Pass (NM002) 

 

 

Battlefields with public interpretation, but no 

visitors center (1) 

Bear Creek (ID001)

 

 

 Battlefields with no public interpretation (0)

 *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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 18

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. There are no local 

advocacy groups dedicated solely to preserving the four battlefields in the Far West. 

Glorieta Pass is part of Pecos National Historical Park and as such enjoys the support of 

the park’s friends group, Friends of Pecos National Historical Park. The friends group was 

established to support the operations and interpretive themes of the Park prior to the 

designation of Glorieta Pass as part of the park. With the designation, the existing 

friends group became a nonprofit advocate for Glorieta Pass. 

Sand Creek Massacre, also a unit of the National Park Service, does not have a specific 

friends group, however, the statewide Colorado Preservation, Inc., serves as an advocate 

for the battlefield. Bear River Massacre and Valverde have no known advocacy 

groups. 

Figure 9. Interpretive sign near the site of the Indian encampments on the Bear River Massacre

battlefield in Idaho. Kathleen Madigan, 2009.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 19

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). 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 20

Sand Creek Massacre (CO001) 

Location Kiowa County 

Campaign Sand Creek Campaign (1864) 

Battle Date(s) November 29-30, 1864 

Principal Commanders Colonel John Chivington [US]; Chief Black Kettle, Cheyenne; Chief 

Left Hand, Arapaho[I] 

Forces Engaged Chivington’s Brigade (approximately 700 men) [US]; 500 Cheyenne 

and a few Arapaho (mostly women and children) [I] 

Results Union victory (massacre) 

Study Area 34,387.61 acres 

The Study Area shows the dual approach route used by Chivington's 

forces from Bent's New Fort up to Sand Creek. The western route, 

used by the military column, relates directly to the initiation of the 

action and the movements over the broken ground used to get 

above the Indian camps and avoid detection for the surprise assault 

on the morning of the 29th. The eastern route, used by the slower 

moving supply train, was added because the supply train location 

was an important factor in determining the extent of the assault 

and the ability of the Colorado soldiers to chase the fleeing Indians. 

The location of the Indian camps, the massacre site, and Indian pony 

herd areas are also included. The Core Area is drawn to include the 

primary massacre site at the creek and areas in which the Third 

Colorado used artillery. 

Potential National 27,027.45 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 2,388.62 acres 

National Park Service, 2,385.43 acres, fee simple 

State of Colorado, 3.19 acres, fee simple

Publicly Accessible Lands 2,388.62 acres 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site, National Park Service, 

 2,385.43 acres 

Queen’s State Wildlife Area, State of Colorado, 3.19 acres

Management Area(s) Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site 

 Queen’s State Wildlife Area 

Friends Group(s) Colorado Preservation Inc. 

Preservation Activities 9 Advocacy 

Since 1993 9 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories

 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects

9 Land or Development Rights Purchased

9 Legislation 

9 Planning Projects 

9 Research and Documentation 

Public Interpretation 9 Brochure(s)

Since 1993 Driving Tour 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 21

 Living History 

9 Maintained Historic Features/Areas

9 Visitor Center

9 Walking Tour/Trails 

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs 

9 Website 

 http://www.nps.gov/sand/ 

 Other 

Condition Statement Land use is little changed since the period of significance. The 

Sand Creek Massacre battlefield is in good condition with only 

limited intrusions since the time of the massacre. The greatest 

threat to the site is erosion caused by wind and water, particularly 

along the ridgeline and sandpits on which US troops stood and 

the Cheyenne and Arapaho attempted to hide themselves from 

attack. This natural erosion is exacerbated by cattle grazing on 

lands near the old Sand Creek bed and massacre site. An historic 

dike, which has since been abandoned, has caused some damage 

to the landscape in the northern portion of the battlefield and 

there are several ranch roads that were not present at the time of 

the massacre. The cottonwoods along the old creek bed, though 

not historic to the landscape of 1864, make it easier to determine 

the path of the original creek. There is also a repatriation plot 

that allows American Indian remains and artifacts from the 

massacre to be interred in earth sacred to the Cheyenne and 

Arapaho. 

The battlefield landscape is in excellent condition; however, there 

is currently only limited interpretation at the Sand Creek Massacre 

site. The National Park Service has only recently acquired lands 

associated with the massacre and is beginning to increase 

interpretation at the battlefield. 

Historical Designation National Register of Historic Places (Sand Creek Massacre National 

 Historic Site, 2001) 

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 22
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 23

Bear River Massacre (ID001) 

Location Franklin County 

Campaign Expedition from Camp Douglas, Utah Territory, to Cache Valley, 

Idaho Territory (1863) 

Battle Date(s) January 29, 1863 

Principal Commanders Colonel Patrick Edward Connor [US]; Chief Bear Hunter [I] 

Forces Engaged District of Utah [US]; Shoshone Indians [I] 

Results Union Victory (massacre) 

Study Area 2,000.00 acres 

The Study Area takes in the entire extent of the battlefield 

including the Federal ridge where the American Indian camp was 

first spotted by US Cavalry, the Federal flank attack to the 

northeast, the Shoshone village, and the canyon where the 

massacre took place and over which the survivors fled until no 

longer pursued by US soldiers. 

Potential National 2,000.00 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 26.00 acres 

 Shoshone Indian Tribe, fee simple 

Publicly Accessible Lands 26.00 acres 

 Shoshone Indian Tribe, fee simple 

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 Land use is little changed since the period of significance. Overall, 

the Bear River Massacre site is in very good condition. The wideopen vistas and rising heights are easy to see as are most of the 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 24

battlefield’s historic defining features, such as the fords over Bear 

River, the ridgeline, the village sites, and the canyon. With the 

exception of limited intursions, the landscape has changed little 

since the time of the massacre. In 1898 the West Cache Canal was 

dug along the massacre site and Shoshone encampment, was 

rebuilt after a flood in 1911, and is still in use today. Several 

landslides in the canyon on the northwest side of the Study Area 

have covered the massacre site and U.S. Route 91 bisects the 

battlefield. 

The Shoshone Tribe uses the heights to the northeast as an 

overlook for its interpretation of the fighting and the massacre 

that ensued. There is a Daughters of Utah Pioneers monument on 

the field near the site of the historic Indian village s. This pull-off 

has become a location for Shoshone offerings to their ancestors. 

Other interpretation of the site is limited as the majority of the 

battlefield is in private ownership. 

Comprehensive preservation planning could help maintain the 

rural battlefield landscape while accommodating future land use 

by privately owned ranches and farms. This could reduce the 

threat of agricultural modernization, which would alter the 

landscape. 

Historical Designation National Historic Landmark (Bear River Massacre Site, 1990) 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 25
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 26

Valverde (NM001) 

Location Socorro County 

Campaign Sibley’s New Mexico Campaign (1862) 

Battle Date(s) February 20 – 21, 1862 

Principal Commanders Colonel Edward R. S. Canby [US]; Brigadier General Henry H. Sibley 

and Colonel Thomas Green [CS] 

Forces Engaged Department of New Mexico (combination of regular and 

volunteer units) [US]; Army of New Mexico [CS] 

Results Confederate Victory 

Study Area 35,432.92 acres 

The Core Area from the 1993 CWSAC study was the actual Valverde 

crossing on the Rio Grande and the area of the hardest fighting. 

This Core Area has been adjusted to take in the sand hills and the 

foot of Black Mesa, both of which were used by the Confederates 

for cover. Two additional Core Areas were added to Valverde’s

Study Area. The first is south of Fort Craig. This Core Area takes 

into account the Union and Confederate armies’ skirmishing and 

artillery exchange. The second Core Area is across the Rio Grande 

and just south of the Black Mesa, which takes into account the 

Union attack on the Confederate camp the night of the 20th and 

the fighting that resumed there on the 21st. 

Potential National 32,922.45 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 148.72 acres 

 Bureau of Land Management (Fort Craig National Historic Site), 

 fee simple 

Publicly Accessible Lands 9,493.79 acres

 Bureau of Land Management (Fort Craig National Historic Site), 

 148.72 acres 

Elephant Butte State Park, 9,345.07 acres 

Management Area(s) Bureau of Land Management 

 Elephant Butte State Park 

Friends Group(s) None

Preservation Activities Advocacy

Since 1993 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories 

 Fundraising 

 Interpretation Projects 

 Land or Development Rights Purchased 

 Legislation 

 Planning Projects 

 Research and Documentation 

Public Interpretation 9 Brochure(s) 

Since 1993 Fort Craig National Historic Site 

 Driving Tour

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

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 27

9 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

Fort Craig National Historic Site 

9 Visitor Center 

Fort Craig National Historic Site 

9 Walking Tour/Trails 

Fort Craig National Historic Site 

9 Wayside Exhibits/Signs 

9 Website: (Fort Craig National Historic Site) 

 http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/recreation/socorro/fort_craig.html 

 Other 

Condition Statement Portions of the landscape have been altered, but most essential 

features remain. The Valverde battlefield landscape is very rural 

and isolated, but its topography in the northern section has been 

impacted by both environmental changes and land use. The exact 

position of the Valverde Fords, around which the major portion of 

fighting occurred, cannot be located at this time. Shifting of the 

Rio Grande over the past 146 years has caused more than twenty 

feet of silt to settle in the area where the fords are believed to 

have been located. This, along with a dense growth of invasive 

salt cedar trees, has altered the battlefield landscape. Salt cedar is 

a very invasive plant that grows so thickly it can obscure 

battlefield-defining features. The only practical removal 

technique involves cutting, poisoning, and burning; all potentially 

harmful to the surrounding landscape. The Burlington Northern 

and Santa Fe railroad and several Bureau of Reclamation canals 

further affect the northern portion of the Study Area. The site of 

Fort Craig, approximately five miles south of the supposed ford 

locations, is managed by the Bureau of Land Management as a 

National Historic Site. Portions of the fort are intact and its 

associated landscape retains excellent integrity. The majority of 

the battlefield on both sides of the Rio Grande is in private 

unprotected ownership and retains a high level of integrity. 

Valverde is the only one of the four Far Western battlefields not 

listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Listing of the 

landscape as a Civil War battlefield would provide recognition for 

this important site. In addition, comprehensive preservation 

planning could help maintain the rural battlefield landscape while 

accommodating future land use by privately owned ranches. 

Historical Designation While Valverde battlefield is not listed in the National Register of 

Historic Places, Fort Craig is listed both for the fort and for its 

association with the battle. National Register of Historic Places 

(Fort Craig, 1970) 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 28
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 29

Glorieta Pass (NM002) 

Location Santa Fe and San Miguel counties

Campaign Sibley’s New Mexico Campaign (1862) 

Battle Date(s) March 26–28, 1862 

Principal Commanders Major John C. Chivington and Colonel John P. Slough [US]; Major 

Charles L. Pyron and Lieutenant Colonel William R. Scurry [CS] 

Forces Engaged Northern Division, Army of New Mexico [US]; Army of New Mexico 

[CS] 

Results Union victory 

Study Area 12,994.06 acres 

The 1993 CWSAC Study Area was expanded to incorporate the 

Confederate advance from the south and the Federal advance from 

and retreat to the east. Additionally the study area was reduced 

around the region of Chivington's flanking movement to reflect 

better the actual terrain. The Core Areas were expanded in Apache 

Canyon to include the running fight as well as Chivington's attack 

near Canyoncito. The Core Areas were all adjusted to include the 

complex terrain and to reflect the actual fighting in the canyons. 

Potential National 12,602.63 acres 

Register Lands 

Protected Lands 1,363.85 acres

 National Park Service, Pecos National Historic Site, fee simple 

Publicly Accessible Lands 4,881.87 acres 

 National Park Service, Pecos National Historic Site, 1363.85 acres 

 USDA Forest Service, Santa Fe National Forrest, 3,518.02 acres 

Management Area(s) Pecos National Historic Site, National Park Service 

 Santa Fe National Forrest, USDA Forest Service 

Friends Group(s) Friends of Pecos NHP 

Preservation Activities 9 Advocacy 

Since 1993 9 Cultural Resource Surveys and Inventories 

9 Fundraising 

9 Interpretation Projects 

 Land or Development Rights Purchased 

9 Legislation 

9 Planning Projects 

9 Research and Documentation 

Public Interpretation 9 Brochure(s) 

Since 1993 Driving Tour 

9 Living History

9 Maintained Historic Features/Areas 

9 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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 30

9 Website: 

 http://www.nps.gov/peco/ 

 Other 

Condition Statement Portions of the Glorieta Pass battlefield landscape have been 

altered, but most essential features remain. Currently, the 

condition of the Glorieta Pass battlefield is good. Pecos National 

Historical Park protects portions of the battlefield. The remaining 

landscape is managed either by the USDA Forest Service or is in 

private ownership. Since the time of the battle, Glorietta Pass and 

the canyon in the Cañoncito/Johnson’s Ranch area have been 

impacted by the construction of Interstate 25. The Apache Creek 

area has been slightly altered by the Burlington Northern and 

Santa Fe railroad whose berm has covered part of the original 

battle site, and the Pigeon Ranch area is being affected by 

increasing traffic use on US 50/66. There has also been steady 

growth towards the battlefield along the Interstate 25 corridor 

east of Santa Fe, as commuters move to the more inexpensive 

outskirts of the city. The State of New Mexico has considered 

ways to mitigate the impact of some of the roads through the 

battlefield and is exploring the possibility of rerouting traffic on 

US 50/66 to avoid the Pigeon Ranch area. At the same time, they 

are also considering widening I-25 and have been in discussions 

with the NPS about the affect this would have on the battlefield 

landscape. 

While potential highway expansion, traffic use, and increasing 

development pressure make Glorieta Pass the most threatened of 

the four battlefields, opportunities exist for public and private 

preservation partnerships to counter these threats and preserve 

the integrity of the landscape. 

Historical Designation National Historic Landmark (Glorieta Pass Battlefield, 1961) 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 31
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 32

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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 33

 ``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 

 subsection $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 34

 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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 35

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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 36

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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 37

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 – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 38

Appendix C. Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants 

In 1998, the ABPP began its land acquisition grant program, which helps states and local 

communities purchase significant Civil War battlefield lands for permanent protection. In 

2002, Congress officially authorized the program.16 Eligible battlefields are those listed in 

the 1993 Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields prepared by the Congressionallychartered CWSAC. Eligible acquisition projects may be for fee interest in land or for a 

protective interest such as a perpetual easement. 

 Congress has appropriated a total of $34.9 million for this Civil War Battlefield Land 

Acquisition Grants. These grants have assisted in the permanent protection of 14,741 acres 

at 59 Civil War battlefields in 14 states. While there have been no applicants from the Far 

Western States, all four of the battlefields profiled in this report are eligible to receive 

funding. 

 

16 The Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 (PL 107- 359) amended the American Battlefield Protection Act of 1996 (16 USC 

469k) to authorize the land acquisition grants. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – States of Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico 39

Grantee Year Project Title Award 

Friends of Pecos 2009 Preservation of Apache 

 $21,400.00 

National Historical Park Canyon Bridge 

National Parks and 

Conservation Association 1998 Restoring Glorieta Battlefield $36,600.00 

 

Total ABPP Planning Grants as of 2009 $58,000.00

Appendix D. American Battlefield Protection Program Planning Grants 

Through its American Battlefield Protection Program, the Federal government also 

provides grants and technical advice to communities working to preserve battlefields. The 

ABPP has two grant programs: planning grants and land acquisition grants. 

Since 1992, the 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. Although all four 

battlefields profiled within this report are eligible for funding, monies have not yet been 

awarded to projects associated with the battles of Bear River and Valverde.