Masthead banner of Park Science: Integrating Research and Resource Management in the National Parks; ISSN 1090-9966; link to current issue
Volume 25
Number 1
Summer 2008
Arrowhead symbol of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior
Home + About + Author Guidelines + Archive + Subscribe +  
Diagram showing connectivity among habitat patches and potential consequences to modifying these patches. Research Report
Using landscape analysis to evaluate ecological impacts of battlefield restoration
By Todd R. Lookingbill, Shawn L. Carter, Bryan Gorsira, and Clayton Kingdon
Published: 15 Jan 2014 (online)  •  30 Jan 2014 (in print)
Pages
 
Abstract
  Introduction
Connectivity
Methods
Results
Conclusions
References
About the authors
+ PDF +
Introduction

Manassas National Battlefield Park (Virginia) was established to preserve the scene of two significant Civil War battles: the First Battle of Manassas, fought on 21 July 1861, and the Second Battle of Manassas, fought 28–30 August 1862. The park also serves as important wildlife habitat in the region. For Manassas and the other 10 parks of the National Capital Region Network, intense land use is a pervasive influence and tends to result in systems dominated by external stressors. The significance of these parks as natural resource refuges likely will increase as urbanization in and around Washington, D.C., leads to continued land conversion of adjacent habitats. Development is rapidly usurping natural areas in northern Virginia, and Manassas National Battlefield Park retains a regionally significant source of intact forest habitat (fig. 1).

Cannon at Manassas National Battlefield Park, Virginia.

TODD LOOKINGBILL

Figure 2. Cannon fire along the flank of the attack was instrumental in turning back the Union advance at Manassas. Battle conditions at the time allowed clear line of sight for these cannons, which now face into a regenerating forest. To re-create these historic conditions, the National Park Service is considering a 124-acre (50 ha) cut of forest to the north of this position.

During the Civil War, Manassas National Battlefield Park was a patchwork of open fields and woodlots scattered across gently rolling hills. Much of the landscape has retained its battlefield character, but secondary forests have replaced open fields in some geographically significant areas. For instance, several skirmishes occurred before the Second Battle of Manassas on 326 acres (132 ha) of farmland rented by John Brawner at the time. This area is now situated along the far northwest corner of the park and has not been maintained since the battles. Current vegetation consists of a mix of mature basic oak-hickory forest interspersed with Virginia pine–eastern red cedar successional forest (Fleming and Weber 2003). These nonhistorical woodlands directly impact interpretation of the battles because forest vegetation now blocks the lines of sight that dictated troop movements and cannon fire (fig. 2, above). Open fields were a historically significant factor in shaping the outcome of much of the fighting.

Nonhistorical woodlands directly impact interpretation of the battles because forest vegetation now blocks the lines of sight that dictated troop movements and cannon fire.

The need to maintain a historic battlefield setting within a piedmont-forest ecosystem creates two potentially opposing management strategies. The National Park Service must consider the effects of its management actions on internal park dynamics and regional-scale ecological processes. Park staff must continually balance natural resource protection (e.g., protecting large tracts of native forest) with cultural landscape preservation (e.g., preventing regeneration to preserve battlefield scenery). In order to restore historic battlefield conditions, the National Park Service plans to clear approximately 124 acres (50 ha) of timber bordering the Brawner Farm (see fig. 6). Harvesting at Manassas provides a case study of how analysis of potential changes in land cover and use (landscape dynamics) can be used to evaluate competing cultural and natural resource factors as a precursor to management action. Monitoring of landscape dynamics can be an extremely valuable source of information for natural resource managers working in mixed land use settings (Gross et al. 2006) and is currently the single most common “vital sign” monitored by the Inventory and Monitoring Program across the country (257 parks in 24 networks).

The need to maintain a historic battlefield setting within a piedmont-forest ecosystem creates two potentially opposing management strategies.

Return to top

This page updated:  5 August 2008
URL: http://www.nature.nps.gov/ParkScience/index.cfm?ArticleID=217&Page=1



Page 1 of 7 • Next +
Departments
 
From the Editor
In This Issue
Comments and Corrections
20 Years Ago in Park Science
Information Crossfile
Profile
Tribute
Science Notes
Field Moment
Meetings of Interest
Masthead Information
FEATURES
 
The decline of elkhorn coral at Buck Island Reef National Monument
Basic ecology of elkhorn coral and threats to its survival
Assessing the effects of ungulates on natural resources at Assateague Island National Seashore
Saving the seabeach amaranth
Collaboration of the Natural Resource and Museum programs: A research tool for information archives at Dinosaur National Monument
Using virtual Research Learning Centers for disseminating science information about national park resources
  Using landscape analysis to evaluate ecological impacts of battlefield restoration
A behavioral intervention tool for recreation managers
Adaptive management for natural parks: Considerations for an experimental approach
Cultivating connection: Incorporating meaningful citizen science into Cape Cod National Seashore’s estuarine research and monitoring programs
Ranking and mapping exotic species at Capulin Volcano and Fort Union national monuments
Related Publications + Explore Nature + NPS.gov + Privacy + Disclaimer + Contact Editor
Web Site Last Updated: 17 January 2014