[Old Lady]

It is true that in one area near the old visitor center, there are many monuments right next to each other.

However, Gettysburg has miles of ground, so the next time you are there explore beyond that crowded region.

When the park was established in the late 1800's, the park service was asked to mark the battle lines -- which they did. You can find the markers. The park service could easily cut a swath through forests, or build paths with placards -- instead of destroying hundreds of acres of old forest.

The original purpose of the park was to honor the dead, and for reflection on the battle. Chamberlain's writings speak with reverence about the land.

The veterans of the Civil War never would have supported this.

It is easy to say "make it look like 1863" until you see the devastation, the millions in cost, environmental damage, and realize it was not the purpose of the park to freeze the landscape in time.

[from occupied ga]

The veterans of the Civil War never would have supported this.

How could you possibly know that? The last one died in what, '59? '61? Do you channel spirits like John Edwards?

[gridlock]

Are they going to make it look like June 30, 1863 or July 4, 1863?

[Tallguy]

When the park was established in the late 1800's, the park service was asked to mark the battle lines -- which they did. You can find the markers. The park service could easily cut a swath through forests, or build paths with placards -- instead of destroying hundreds of acres of old forest.

What the heck are you talking about? What they are doing is removing a few stands of trees that have altered the sight lines on the battlefield. This is not a forest, for crying out loud. I live less than 30 minutes from Gettysburg.

[civilwar]

I am really surprised how many people THINK that they know what the civil war veterans would or would not support.
I have been to Gettysburg to many times to count and talked to alot of knowledgeable people there and as far as any one I have talk to the only witness tree that stands is off by it self in a field. If you look at any of the books written by William Frassnito, on Gettysburg, you will be able to see that the trees grew well after the battle. If you go look at the spirt of St Louis do you want to see it or do you want to see it with a coat of paint that is not suppose to be there. Please don't use civil war history to try to save a few trees, tell the truth you don't want to see any tree cut.

[Badeye]

My wife and I actually talked about buying the Cordori farm when we visited, couldn’t believe it was ‘on the block’ for only around a 100k back then

[norton]

"Environmental damage"?

Are you saying that the antebellum environment was worse than today's?
(That'll rile Al Gore up pretty good)

I've only been to Gettysburg once and don't claim to be a real scholar.
But, the guides were constantly repeating that you would be able to understand better if the huge numbers of postwar trees were not in the way.

The Devil's Den itself is a good example:
you couldn't even see where the original assault came from or the ground it covered.

IIRC, there was a single opening cut into the trees in front of the main Union lines so you could get a feel for the actual distance that Picket's troops had to cover while under flanking fire.