Download Jenkins` Ferry Pres plan Draft.indd

Document related concepts

Battle of Fredericksburg wikipedia, lookup

Second Battle of Corinth wikipedia, lookup

Red River Campaign wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Antietam wikipedia, lookup

Conclusion of the American Civil War wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Lewis's Farm wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Seven Pines wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Wilson's Creek wikipedia, lookup

Military history of African Americans in the American Civil War wikipedia, lookup

Battle of New Bern wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Namozine Church wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Shiloh wikipedia, lookup

Georgia in the American Civil War wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Gaines's Mill wikipedia, lookup

Union (American Civil War) wikipedia, lookup

First Battle of Bull Run wikipedia, lookup

Opposition to the American Civil War wikipedia, lookup

Mississippi in the American Civil War wikipedia, lookup

Jubal Early wikipedia, lookup

Arkansas in the American Civil War wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Cedar Creek wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Harpers Ferry wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Mount Elba wikipedia, lookup

Battle of Jenkins' Ferry wikipedia, lookup

Transcript
Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Preservation Plan
GRANT COUNTY, ARKANSAS
(GA 2255-12-007)
DRAFT
PREPARED BY
MUDPUPPY & WATERDOG, INC.
VERSAILLES, KENTUCKY 40383
PREPARED FOR
FRIENDS OF JENKINS’ FERRY BATTLEFIELD
SHERIDAN, ARKANSAS 72150
FUNDED BY
AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD PROTECTION PROGRAM
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
WASHINGTON, DC 20005
JULY 31, 2013
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Preservation Plan
GRANT COUNTY, ARKANSAS
(GA 2255-12-007)
DRAFT
PREPARED BY
JOSEPH E. BRENT
MARIA CAMPBELL BRENT
MUDPUPPY & WATERDOG, INC.
129 WALNUT STREET
VERSAILLES, KENTUCKY 40383
859-879-8509
PREPARED FOR
FRIENDS OF JENKINS’ FERRY BATTLEFIELD
165 GRANT 81
SHERIDAN, ARKANSAS 72150
870-942-2936
FUNDED BY
AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD PROTECTION PROGRAM
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
1201 EYE STREET, NW (2255)
WASHINGTON, DC 20005
202-354-2023
JULY 31, 2013
This material is based upon work assisted by a grant from the Department of the Interior, National Park
Service. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of the Interior.
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ............................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgments......................................................................................................v
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................vi
Introduction ................................................................................................................1
I. The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry ...................................................................................7
II. The Cleared Fields in the Saline Bottom...............................................................38
III. KOCOA Analysis .................................................................................................48
IV. The Battlefield Today ...........................................................................................63
V. Cultural and Natural Resources .............................................................................68
VI. Previous Preservation Activities ..........................................................................76
VII. The Planning Process .........................................................................................82
VIII. Preserving the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield ..........................................................90
IX. Interpreting the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield ...........................................................113
X. Recommended Actions .........................................................................................126
XI. Bibliography ........................................................................................................132
Appendix 1 – Applying for Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants ..............................137
Appendix 2 – National Heritage Areas ......................................................................146
Appendix 3 – Resources for Technical Support.........................................................148
i
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
LIST OF FIGURES
1 Project location .......................................................................................................5
2 Battlefield location ..................................................................................................6
3 Red River Campaign as envisioned by Union Gen. Nathaniel Banks ...................8
4 Rear Admiral David D. Porter, U.S. .......................................................................9
5 Major General Nathanial Banks, U.S. ...................................................................9
6 Major General Frederick Steele, U.S. ....................................................................9
7 Steele’s route during the Camden Expedition .........................................................10
8 Major General Sterling Price, C.S. .........................................................................11
9 General Edmund Kirby Smith, C.S. ......................................................................12
10 Brigadier General James F. Fagan, C.S. .............................................................13
11 April 29, 1864 – First Engagement .......................................................................15
12 Brigadier General Frederick Salomon, U.S. .........................................................17
13 Lieutenant Colonel Cyrus Mackay, U.S. ..............................................................18
14 Brigadier General Samuel Rice, U.S. ...................................................................18
15 April 30, 1864 – Col. Colton Greene’s attack .......................................................20
16 Brigadier General James C. Tappan, C.S. .............................................................21
17 April 30, 1864 – Assault of Tappan’s Brigade ......................................................23
18 Brigadier General Thomas J. Churchill, C.S. .......................................................24
19 April 30, 1864 – Assault by Hawthorne’s Brigade ..............................................25
20 Brigadier General Mosby Parson, C.S. .................................................................27
21 April 30, 1864 – Assault of Parsons Missouri Brigade .........................................30
22 Major General John G. Walker, C.S......................................................................32
23 April 30, 1864 – Assault of Walker’s Texas Division ...........................................34
24 Detail of Venable map ...........................................................................................35
25 1864 map drawn by Richard Venable ...................................................................40
26 Richard Venable and other Confederate officers...................................................41
27 Edwin C. Bearss’s map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield ......................................42
28 Joe Walker’s map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield ...............................................43
29 2013 map of the fields in the Saline bottom .........................................................47
30 2009 American Battlefield Protection Program Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield map....50
31 1864 Venable map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield ..............................................51
32 Key Terrain Features .............................................................................................53
33 Observations and Fields of Fire ............................................................................56
34 Cover and Concealment ........................................................................................58
35 Obstacles ...............................................................................................................60
36 Avenues of Approach and Retreat .........................................................................62
37 The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield Core and Study Area as defined by the 2009
American Battlefield Protection Program survey .................................................65
38 View of the Burning Field area .............................................................................64
39 Military road (Dallas County 409) in the southern portion of the battlefield .......66
40 General area of the Union line in Saline River bottom .........................................67
ii
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
41 Tulip Methodist Church Cemetery........................................................................69
42 Guesses Creek .......................................................................................................69
43 Cannonball House site ..........................................................................................69
44 1990s photograph of Giles house..........................................................................70
45 Site of the Giles house ..........................................................................................70
46 Military road (Dallas County 409) in Dallas County...........................................70
47 Rufus Taylor house ...............................................................................................70
48 Cox Creek .............................................................................................................71
49 Saline River bottom ..............................................................................................71
50 Saline River...........................................................................................................72
51 Old Jenkins’ Ferry landing road ............................................................................73
52 Cultural and Natural Resources map 1 of 3 ..........................................................74
53 Cultural and Natural Resources map 2 of 3 ..........................................................75
54 Cultural and Natural Resources map 3 of 3 ..........................................................76
55 UDC Monument at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park.......................................................77
56 Jenkins’ Ferry State Park.......................................................................................78
57 Core Area and National Historic Landmark boundaries .......................................80
58 Interpretive signage at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park ..................................................79
59 Alberta Harper, Maria Brent and Jerrell Harper in the Saline River bottom ........83
60 Hayes Swayze, Tommy Green, Brenda Stuckey, Maria Brent and
Richard Jenkins tour the battlefield.......................................................................84
61 Attendees of the first community meeting in Sheridan, Arkansas ........................86
62 A portion of the military road in Dallas County ...................................................89
63 Water in the Saline River bottoms in June 2013 ...................................................89
64 Military road in Dallas County .............................................................................91
65 Jenkins’ Ferry State Park preserves over 40 acres of the battlefield .....................92
66 The Jenkins’ Ferry Gallery at the Grant County Museum ....................................93
67 Fort Diamond in Camden, Arkansas is a city park and open to the public ...........94
68 Guesses Creek in the First Engagement Site ........................................................100
69 Phillips Trail, the old military road, in Dallas County ..........................................100
70 This gate marks the site of the Cannonball House. .............................................100
71 This concrete porch is all that remains of the Giles house...................................100
72 Priority Parcels for the April 29, 1864, First Engagement Site ............................103
73 Cannonball House, ca. 1967 .................................................................................101
74 Core Area of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield ...........................................................104
75 The cleared fields in the Saline bottom are now covered in hardwoods. ..............105
76 A hunting camp located on the battlefield. ............................................................105
77 Priority Parcels of the April 30, 1864, Main Engagement Site .............................109
78 Planted pine in the vicinity of the Burning Field. .................................................110
79 priority Parcels of the May 1, 1864, Burning Field ..............................................112
80 Interpretive panel at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park, 1 of 3 ..........................................115
81 Interpretive panel at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park, 2 of 3 ..........................................115
iii
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
82 Interpretive panel at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park, 3 of 3 ..........................................115
83 Mock-up of tour stop sign for proposed driving tour ...........................................116
84 Route of proposed driving tour .............................................................................118
85 Primary interpretive locations. ..............................................................................121
86 Location of proposed interpretation in Saline River bottom ................................125
iv
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to thank the following individuals for assisting with this project.
Mark Christ, Community Outreach Director, Arkansas Historic Preservation Program
Shayla Albey, Park Planner/Historic Preservation Specialist, Arkansas State Parks
Jeff King, Chief Park Planner, Arkansas State Parks
Mitchell Johnson, Real Estate Officer, Arkansas State Parks
Randy Roberson, Manager of Planning and Development, Arkansas State Parks
Kenneth Bolden, Board Member, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Alberta Harper, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Jerrell Harper, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Tommy Green, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Richard Jenkins, Co-Chair, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Ron Kelley, Co-Chair, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Brenda Stuckey, Secretary/Treasurer, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Hayes Swayze, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Roy Wilson, Board Member, Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
Randy Yarberry
Steve Davis, Mayor of Leola
Missy Emberton, Deputy Assessor, Grant County Assessor Office
Kemp Nall, Grant County Judge Executive
Becky Nichols, Executive Director, Grant County Chamber of Commerce
Kristy Pruitt, Grant Count Assessor
Lindsey Stanton, Director, Grant County Museum
Joe Wise, Mayor of Sheridan
v
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan was funded by the American Battlefield
Protection Program in 2012 (GA-2255-12-007) and the planning process was initiated
by the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield with assistance from the Arkansas Historic
Preservation Program in 2013. Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc. of Versailles, Kentucky, was
chosen in a competitive bidding process to complete the plan.
BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry began on April 29, 1864, when the vanguard of Gen.
Edmund Kirby Smith’s Confederate army caught Gen. Frederick Steele’s Union army
south of Leola, Arkansas. The Union forces held off the Confederates that day, allowing
the Union army to escape into the Saline River bottom. On April 30, 1864, Union infantry
repulsed a succession of Confederate attacks, which allowed the Union army to continue
its retreat to Little Rock unmolested. Their failure at the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry lost the
Confederates any chance they may have had to capture the Union army or retake Little
Rock.
JENKINS’ FERRY BATTLEFIELD TODAY
The 8,700-acre Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield (AR016) is located in Dallas and Grant counties,
Arkansas. The battlefield is mostly wooded and retains excellent integrity. For the
purpose of this plan, three areas of significance were defined:
April 29, 1864, First Engagement Site – Along Dallas County 409/Grant County 1
April 30, 1864, Main Engagement Site – Roughly between Leola, Cox Creek, SR
46 and the Saline River in Grant County.
May 1, 1864, Burning Field – Approximately two miles north of the community
of Dogwood at the intersection of SR 46 and SR 291.
THE CLEARED FIELDS
At the time of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry there were three cleared fields along the
military road in the Saline River bottom where the main engagement took place. Over the
years the ownership and the names of these fields has been disputed and maps produced
giving the fields different names. The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield wanted
ownership of these fields verified as part of the planning project. After a thorough review
of the available historic documents it has been determined that the fields should be called
from south to north: Carver/Jenkins, Dortch and Tucker.
vi
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
BATTLEFIELD RESOURCES
The Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield is composed of both cultural and natural resources. Natural
resources that help define the battlefield landscape include ridgelines, bottom land, rivers,
wetlands and creeks. There are very few extant cultural resources associated with the
battlefield but there is high probability of a intact archeological deposits.
PAST BATTLEFIELD PRESERVATION EFFORTS
In the 1960s, Arkansas State Parks purchased 36.35 acres of battlefield land and leased
3.65 acres that contained the north side Jenkins’ Ferry crossing from the Sheridan
Masonic lodge. This is the only battlefield land that has been preserved. Other
preservation or commemorative activities include:
United Daughters of the Confederacy erected a monument in 1928.
In 1970, just over 26 acres of the battlefield were listed in the National Register of
Historic Places.
In 1993, the battlefield was identified by the Civil War Sites Advisory
Commission Survey as one of the nation’s most significant.
In 1994, 1,900 acres were listed as part of the Camden Expedition National
Historic Landmark.
RECOMMENDATIONS
This plan identifies 8,709.33 acres to be preserved at three discontiguous locations: the
April 29, 1864, First Engagement Site; the April 30, 1864, Main Engagement Site; and
the May 1, 1864, Burning Field. The individual parcels at each of the three sites are
ranked as high, medium and low priority. Purchase in fee simple is recommended for all
high priority land. Medium and low priority land can be preserved through a combination
of purchase and conservation easements.
APRIL 29, 1864, FIRST ENGAGEMENT SITE
Twelve parcels totaling 1,386.58 acres are identified for preservation.
High priority parcels total 590 acres.
354.08 acres are ranked medium priority.
442.5 acres are ranked low priority land.
vii
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
APRIL 30, 1864, MAIN ENGAGEMENT SITE
Fifty-one parcels totaling 6,106.060 acres are identified for preservation.
High priority parcels total 1,790.750 acres.
2,251.3 acres are ranked medium priority.
2,054.010 acres are ranked low priority.
MAY 1, 1864, BURNING FIELD
Three parcels totaling 1,216 acres are identified for preservation.
All 1,216 acres are ranked high priority.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS, 2013-2014
APPLY FOR ABPP FUNDING
The grant cycle for the American Battlefield Protection Program usually begins in
the fall. Apply for funding to conduct an archeological survey.
BEGIN A DIALOGUE WITH LANDOWNERS
Share the plan with landowners and enlist their support. Make them aware that
their land is part of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield, that it is significant historically,
and why it’s important to preserve it.
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES
Take advantage of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Historic
Preservation Foundation of Arkansas, and the American Association for State and
Local History and the information they have available on a wealth of preservation
and interpretation topics.
CREATE NEW PARTNERSHIPS
The opportunity for partnerships exists. Reach out to organizations and
individuals. Ask them to help you and work with you to preserve the Jenkins’
Ferry battlefield.
EMBRACE THE CIVIL WAR SESQUICENTENNIAL
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry sesquicentennial commemoration is an opportunity
to garner publicity and broaden your base of support. Invite elected officials,
Arkansas State Parks, and potential partners to participate or attend.
viii
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
INVESTIGATE CREATING A CAMDEN EXPEDITION NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA
Meet with the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program to discuss creating a
Camden Expedition National Heritage Area. Reach out to those with similar
interests to develop a strategy and then reach out to your congressman and U.S.
senators.
CREATE A BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY DRIVING TOUR
A simple driving tour will allow visitors to experience the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry
in more depth than is now possible, and the tour signs will inform residents that
there is a significant Civil War battlefield in their county.
ix
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Introduction
1
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
INTRODUCTION
The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield initiated this planning project in 2012 when they
submitted a grant application for funding to the American Battlefield Protection Program
(ABPP). In 2013, the ABPP awarded the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield a grant
(GA-2255-10-011) to develop a battlefield preservation plan for the Battle of Jenkins’
Ferry (AR016).
The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield selected Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc. to prepare
the preservation plan. Over the course of the project Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc.
traveled to Arkansas four times to conduct research, visit the battlefield, hold community
meetings, and meet with the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield and stakeholders. The
project has been both interesting and exciting as more and more information on the
battlefield has been gathered. The visits to the battlefield brought an understanding of the
landscape that can only be obtained by walking the terrain with experienced guides. The
members of Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield continued to discover new information
over the course of the project, information they freely shared.
For years, the 1993, Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report of the Nation’s Civil
War Battlefields was the baseline of information for sites that the ABPP funded. That
information is now 20 years old. The resurvey of the Commission battlefields was
completed in 2009 and the report, Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission
Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, is in draft form. To ensure that the
information in this plan is as up-to-date as possible, the authors used data from the draft
update report as well as the 1993 Civil War Sites Advisory Commission data.
THE BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY
In the spring of 1864, Union forces in Louisiana and Arkansas set in motion a twopronged attack on the Confederates in the Trans-Mississippi. The goal of this campaign
was to capture Shreveport, Louisiana, and the abundant cotton crop in the region,
which could be used to fuel mills on the east coast. The campaign, called the Red
River Campaign in Louisiana and the Camden Expedition in Arkansas, was a failure.
Confederate forces turned the Union advance back. The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry was the
last battle of the Camden Expedition.
In late April 1864, the Union army under Gen. Frederick Steele was retreating from
Camden and marching back toward Little Rock, where much needed rations for its
men and forage for its animals could be obtained. The Union army was trying to reach
2
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
the Saline River crossing on military road known as Jenkins’ Ferry. Soon after the lead
elements of the army arrived on April 29, 1864, Union engineers built a pontoon bridge
across the Saline. The main battle was fought on April 30, 1864, between Union infantry
holding the Saline River bottom and Confederate infantry and cavalry desperately
trying to rout the Union forces so that they could crush Steele and retake Little Rock.
The Confederates failed. Once across the pontoon bridge on May 1, 1864, the Union
quartermaster burned hundreds of wagons and the army marched on to Little Rock.
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry was not so much a defeat for the Confederates as a missed
opportunity. Perhaps technically the Confederates won the battle as they held the field at
the end of the day. However, they failed to trap and destroy Steele, and the Union army
escaped and continued on to Little Rock. It was a bloody and brutal battle fought in the
most inhospitable of conditions.
THE BATTLEFIELD
For the purposes of this plan, the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield is defined as three discrete
locations associated with three significant events: the site of the first engagement on April
29, 1864; the site of the main engagement on April 30, 1864; and burning field where
Steele ordered the wagons burned on May 1, 1864. All of these locations fall within the
2009 Study Area and are vital to understanding the battle and its outcome.
The April 29, 1864, engagement is where the Confederates made contact with the
retreating Union army for the first time since leaving Camden three days earlier. The
fighting on Guesses Creek where the Confederate vanguard engaged the Union rearguard
was the first significant action of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. The Union army was strung
out on the road for miles between the engagement site and the Saline River bottom. If
the rearguard had been pushed aside the Union army might have been routed. But the
rearguard held its ground and the battle for Arkansas was not won that day.
This first engagement site is located near the Dallas-Grant County line just south of
Leola, Arkansas. The Confederate line was on a ridge west of Guesses Creek. The Union
line was on a ridge east of the creek and the military road, which crossed the Guesses
Creek floodplain en route to the Saline River.
In the early morning hours of April 30, 1864, Confederate cavalry led the first of
five major assaults on the Union line in the muddy bottoms of the Saline River. The
Confederates could not dislodge the stubborn Union infantry and finally withdrew;
allowing Gen. Frederick Steele’s army to cross the river and destroy the pontoon bridge.
3
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The main engagement site is in the Saline River bottom, just north of Leola, Arkansas, in
Grant County. The southern boundary is formed by AR 229 and a ridge line in the south.
An open area just west of Cox Creek roughly forms the western boundary. The Saline
River is the northern boundary and SR 46 and wetlands just beyond define the eastern
boundary. The 1,900-acre National Historic Landmark boundary is within this area.
The next day, the Union army burned over 200 wagons and abandoned all of the army’s
lame and exhausted animals and marched for Little Rock. The place where the wagons
were burned has become known as the “Burning Field.” This action ended the Battle of
Jenkins’ Ferry.
The burning field is located approximately four miles north of the Saline River in
Sections 28 and 33, T6S R14W, just west of SR 46 in Grant County. The exact location of
the archeological remains of the burning field has not been determined (Figures 1& 2).
The latest available data states that the battlefield covers just over 7,796 acres. As noted
above, 1,900 acres are within the National Historic Landmark boundary. Only 40 acres of
the battlefield have been preserved. The State of Arkansas owns 36.35 acres at Jenkins’
Ferry State Park and has a 99-year lease on another 3.65 acres. This battlefield retains
excellent integrity and every effort should be made to preserve it.
4
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Project Location
Grant and Dallas Counties, Arkansas
ARKANSAS
0
Project
Location
1
2
3
4
5
MILES
Ico
167
G R A N T
35
46
Providence
291
229
270
Prattsville
Poyen
270
Sheridan
270
Center Grove
Prague
46
291
229
Cedar Branch
Dogwood
222
229
35
Cross
Roads
190
Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park
46
167
Leola
Grapevine
46
229
35
DA L L A S
9
48
Tulip
Carthage
Jenkins’ Ferry
Battlefield, Figure 2
Figure 1: Project location
5
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
291
Wagons Burned
May 1, 1864
229
46
Dogwood
8
222
Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park
229
46
Main Engagement
April 30,1864
Leola
46
G R A N T
DA L L A S
First Engagement
April 29, 1864
229
48
48
Carthage
Tulip
Tulip Methodist
Cemetery
0
1
2
3
48
MILES
Figure 2: Battlefield location
6
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The Battle of jenkins’ Ferry
7
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY
THE CAMDEN EXPEDITION
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry was the last battle of the Camden Expedition―a twopronged offensive undertaken by the Union army in the Trans-Mississippi as part of the
Red River Campaign. The Red River Campaign was part of a larger Union strategy to
capture four important Confederate cities: Richmond, Atlanta, Mobile and Shreveport.
The stated objectives of the campaign were to capture Shreveport, invade Texas, cripple
Confederate resistance west of the Mississippi River, seize cotton land, and prevent
Mexican Emperor Maximilian from sending troops into the region. In large part,
however, the campaign was about securing cotton for mills in New England (Figure 3).1
Figure 3: The Red River Campaign as envisioned by Union
Gen. Nathaniel Banks.
The campaign was the brainchild
of Major General Henry W.
Halleck, then general-in-chief
of the Union army, and required
the coordination of three
departments and the navy. Gen.
Nathaniel Banks had 18,150 men.
He borrowed 10,000 infantry
from Major General William T.
Sherman, which came to Louisiana
under the command of Brigadier
General Andrew J. Smith from
Mississippi. This gave Banks
nearly 30,000 soldiers. The naval
arm of the expedition was under
the command of Rear Admiral
David D. Porter (Figure 4) and
consisted of 13 ironclads, four
tinclads and several other armed
vessels. It was a formidable force.2
1 Ludwell H. Johnson, Red River Campaign: Politics & Cotton in the Civil War, The Kent State University
Press, Kent, Ohio, 1993, pp. 49-78 and 80.
2 Michael J. Forsyth, The Camden Expedition of 1864 and the Opportunity Lost by the Confederacy to
Change the Civil War, McFarland & Company, Jefferson, North Carolina, 2003, pp. 6-7 and Johnson, Red
River Campaign, pp. 99-100.
8
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figures 4-5:
Rear Adm.
David D. Porter, U.S.(left)
and Maj. Gen.
Nathaniel
Banks U.S.
(right).
The Red River Campaign began on March 12, 1864, when Union Major General
Nathaniel Banks (Figure 5) left Simmesport, Louisiana. A reluctant partner in this
sweeping campaign, Major General Frederick Steele, received an order three days
later from the new Union army general-in-chief, Major General Ulysses S. Grant.
Grant ordered Steele to “Move your force in full
co-operation with General N.P. Banks’ attack on
Shreveport. A mere demonstration will not be
sufficient. Now that a large force has gone up Red
River it is necessary that Shreveport and the Red
River should come into our possession.”3 By March
27, Banks had reached Alexandria and was halfway
to his goal of Shreveport, the Confederate capital
of the Trans-Mississippi. In spite of Grant’s order,
the Arkansas portion of the campaign did not get
underway until March 23.
Figure 6: Maj.
Gen. Frederick Steele, U.S.
Steele had valid reasons for opposing the campaign
(Figure 6). He knew that by the time the Red and
Ouachita rivers were navigable, the bottoms would
3 U.S. War Department, The War of the Rebellion: a Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and
Confederate Armies, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1880-1901, Series I, Vol. XXXIV
Part I, p. 616, hereafter cited as O.R.
9
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
be virtually impassable. His cavalry was in bad shape due to overwork and a lack of
forage. His supply lines out of Little Rock would be stretched thin and vulnerable
to attack by Confederate guerrillas. Steele had only about 16,000 troops in his entire
command, and they were spread from Pine Bluff to Little Rock to Fort Smith. In
addition, Steele was involved with the Lincoln administration’s plan for creating a loyal
government in Arkansas. Elections for that government were scheduled for March 14 and
he wanted to see the project through.4
Given no choice but to follow Grant’s orders, Steele stripped Little Rock of all but 4,000
troops and marched south. As a result of his reluctance to undertake the offensive, his
army of 8,500 was ill-supplied. Steele ordered Brigadier General John M. Thayer to bring
his 3,500-man division from Fort Smith and rendezvous with him at Arkadelphia on April
1. Steele ordered Colonel Powell Clayton, the commander at Pine Bluff, to distract the
Confederates. To that end, Clayton intercepted and defeated a Confederate detachment at
Mt. Elba in Cleveland County, east of Steele’s line of march (Figure 7).5
The Camden
Expedition
Little Rock
er
ita Riv
a ch
u
O
Steele’s
Route
Hot Springs
Rockport
Litt
le
rk
A
uri
isso
M
Pine Bluff
Jenkins’
Ferry
Arkadelphia
Sa
lin
r
e
R ive
a n sas Ri
ver
r
Rive
Elkin’s Ferry
Prairie D’Ane
Washington
Spring Hill
Poison
Spring
Marks’
Mills
Camden
Re
d
Ou
ac
h
ver
Ri
ita
Monticello
Ri
ve
r
El Dorado
© Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc., 2013
Figure 7: Steele’s route during the Camden Exposition
4 Ira D. Richards, “The Camden Expedition, March 23-May 3, 1864,” MA Thesis, University of Arkansas,
1958, pp. 9-12.
5 Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, pp. 73-74.
10
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Steele arrived in Arkadelphia on March 29. The poorly provisioned Union soldiers had
been eating half rations almost since they left Little Rock on March 23. After spending
two days in the Clark County seat, Steele pushed forward without linking with Thayer.
With his cavalry in front, Steele began moving his infantry and supply train south along
the military road in the general direction of Washington, then the Confederate capital of
Arkansas.6
Between April 2 and April 4, as Steele moved toward the Little Missouri River, he fought
a series of engagements with Brigadier General Joseph O. Shelby’s cavalry north of the
river. Steele forced his way across the river at Elkin’s Ferry despite Confederate Brigadier
General John S. Marmaduke’s attempt to stop him. By the time Thayer finally caught up
with Steele on April 9, the purpose of the expedition had essentially come to an end. The
Confederates had defeated Banks at Mansfield, Louisiana, on April 8. He won a battle
at Pleasant Hill the following day but panicked and began his retreat to Grand Ecore,
Louisiana, ending the campaign.7
After the fighting at Elkin’s Ferry, Confederate
Major General Sterling Price (Figure 8) moved
north from Camden, adding his cavalry to
Marmaduke’s and swelling the Confederate
numbers to around 7,000. Even with the addition of
Price’s men, Steele and Thayer’s combined Union
force outnumbered the Confederates by about
5,000 men. The two forces clashed on April 10 at
Prairie D’Ane.8
Figure 8: Maj. Gen. Sterling Price C.S.
The Confederates were convinced that Steele’s
target was Washington. Steele had no intention
of going to Washington; he only wanted to make
Price believe that he was. Steele planned to pull
the Confederates in the direction of Washington
and then march east for Camden. After two days
of fighting, including a rare night assault, Price
6 Robert L. Kerby, Kirby Smith’s Confederacy: The Trans-Mississippi South, 1863-1865, Columbia
University Press, New York, 1972, p. 300 and Thomas A. DeBlack, With Fire and Sword: Arkansas 18611874, University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2003, p. 110.
7 Kerby, Kirby Smith’s Confederacy, pp. 301-308.
8 Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, pp. 92-93.
11
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
withdrew toward Washington, hoping to draw Steele out. Steele seized the opportunity
to move east. A rearguard action fought at Moscow Church allowed Steele to make good
his escape and ended the action at Prairie D’Ane. Neither side lost many men during the
fighting but Steele had bested Price at Prairie D’Ane.9
Steele spent eleven days in Camden, arriving on April 15, 1864. He still had no
knowledge of what had happened to Banks’ expedition in Louisiana. Camden proved
a safe harbor, but Steele’s army was still low on food and forage. Learning that there
was corn near Poison Spring, on April 18 Steele sent 177 wagons and 670 soldiers with
artillery to get it. The Confederates were waiting. The Union army lost 175 wagons and
301 soldiers and gained nothing.10
On April 20, 150 wagons arrived from Pine Bluff bringing much needed rations. The
following day Steele learned that Maj. Gen. Nathaniel Banks’ army had been defeated
and was moving away from Shreveport. On April
22, Steele added 61 of his surviving wagons to
the wagons of the supply train and sent it back
out toward Pine Bluff with an escort of 1,200 men
and four pieces of artillery. On April 25, Brigadier
General John F. Fagan and Brig. Gen. Joseph O.
Shelby’s Confederate cavalry caught that force at
Marks’ Mill. The Confederates captured all 210
government wagons and at least 1,300 soldiers.
The Battle of Marks’ Mill forced Steele’s hand.
He knew he had to abandon Camden and return to
Little Rock.11
Figure 9: Gen. Edmund Kirby Smith, C.S.
The day Steele marched into Camden Confederate
General Edmund Kirby Smith (Figure 9) left
Shreveport with three infantry divisions. He
planned to destroy Steele’s army and to march
into Little Rock and St. Louis and free Arkansas
and Missouri from Union control. They were
9 Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, p. 99 and J.H. Atkinson, “The Action at Prairie De Ann,” The Arkansas
Historical Quarterly, Vol. XIX, No. 1, Spring 1960, p. 50.
10 Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, pp. 108-116.
11 Edwin C. Bearss, Steele’s Retreat from Camden & the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, reprint edition, Civil War
Roundtable Associates, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1990, pp. 42-79.
12
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
grand plans. Kirby Smith ordered Brig. Gen. James F.
Fagan to get between Steele and Little Rock, wreck
Union supply lines, and slow their march. Fagan failed
(Figure 10). He could not get across the Saline River
and on April 29, 1864, while Steele’s army fought its
way into the Saline bottoms Fagan was in Arkadelphia
looking for supplies. Fagan failed to find Steele and his
veterans were not available when Kirby Smith needed
them most.12
THE ENGAGEMENT OF APRIL 29, 1864
Steele’s army slipped out of Camden on April 26, 1864,
moving along Princeton Road toward Jenkins’ Ferry.
The army marched north, passing through Princeton
and on to Tulip, where it took the military road north.
In the early afternoon of April 29, 1864, just as it was
Figure 10:
beginning to rain, Steele arrived on the outskirts of
Brig. Gen. James Fagan, C.S.
Leola, then Sandy Springs. Colonel Adolph Engelmann’s
Third Brigade drew the assignment of guarding the rear of Steele’s beleaguered army as it
pushed north toward Jenkins’ Ferry.13
On the afternoon of April 29, the Union army, probably numbering around 10,000,
was strung-out between Leola and Guesses Creek in northern Dallas County when the
Confederates finally caught them. Skirmishing began between lead elements of the
Confederates and the 6th Kansas Cavalry. Word passed to Col. Engelmann that contact
had been made and that the enemy was approaching in large numbers. Engelmann formed
a line with two companies of the 40th Iowa, two of the 43rd Illinois and two artillery
pieces to slow the Confederate pursuit as the rest of the army—infantry, cavalry, artillery,
Contraband refugees and hundreds of wagons—moved north on the road to Jenkins’
Ferry on the Saline River.14
Colonel Colton Greene in his after-action report states that he caught Steele’s rearguard
between Princeton and Tulip. It is unclear where the skirmishing began. It may have
12 Gary Dillard Joiner, “Fred Steele’s Dilemma and Kirby Smith’s Quest for Glory,” in Mark Christ, editor,
“The Earth Reeled and Trees Trembled:” Civil War Arkansas 1863-1864, The Old State House Museum,
Little Rock, Arkansas 2007, pp. 98-99.
13 Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, p. 122 and DeBlack, With Fire and Sword, p. 115.
14 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 723.
13
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
begun somewhere between Princeton and Tulip or north of Tulip. The reports are fuzzy
and their understanding of the geography of the area might also be fuzzy. Regardless, it
seems very clear that an intense engagement began the afternoon of April 29. Colonel
William L. Jeffers 8th Missouri Cavalry, Major Robert C. Wood’s 14th Missouri Battalion
and Samuel S. Harris’s Missouri Battery formed the Confederate vanguard that caught up
with Engelmann’s rearguard on the military road somewhere south of Sandy Springs.15
Engelmann’s main concern was holding the Confederates at bay long enough for Steele’s
army to make its way across the Saline River. Perhaps 1,000 Contraband—Freedom
Seekers—left Camden and other places along the line of march and found themselves
in a desperate situation as the Confederate army closed in. The old military road from
Tulip follows the top of a ridge through north Dallas County before it falls into the
bottoms formed by Guesses Creek. There may well have been a running battle on the
ridge between whichever Confederate cavalry units were on the north edge of the pursuit
and the 6th Kansas Cavalry. Riders from the Kansas Cavalry kept Engelmann informed,
allowing him to deploy on a broad plateau near the Chapman house, better known as the
Cannonball House, about three-quarters of a mile east of where the old military road
makes a 90-degree turn down into the Guesses Creek bottom.16
Engelmann sent skirmishers down the ridge and engaged the Confederates as Col. Jeffers
deployed his artillery on the ridge west of the bottom. Harris’s four guns opened fire and
at least one Confederate round went through the gable end of the Chapman house. Two
pieces of the Springfield Light Artillery, which Engelmann calls Vaughn’s Battery in his
report, unlimbered near the Chapman house and returned fire. This thin Union line kept
up a “deliberate and effective” fire. Engelmann stymied the Confederate pursuit as the
vanguard was too small to take on infantry and artillery (Figure 11).17
Engelmann formed a second line made with the 43rd Illinois, 27th Wisconsin and four
guns of the Springfield Light Artillery but did not specify where the second line was
formed. Given the terrain, the best place would have been on the knoll where the Giles
house stood east of the military road. This location would have allowed the Union
infantry to deploy on both sides of the road with the artillery unlimbered in the center.
A line here would have forced the Confederates to come up the road out of the bottom
under fire. It would have made them advance slowly and cautiously, buying more time for
15 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 834.
16 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 670 and Elwin L. Goolsby, “The Lost Houses of Jenkins Ferry,”
Grassroots: Journal of the Grant County Museum, August, 1999, p. 2.
17 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, pp. 723-724 and Bearss, Retreat from Camden, p. 112.
14
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 11: April 29, 1864 - First Engagement
15
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
the Union army to get into the Saline River bottom. Engelmann leapfrogged his brigade
along the military road, forming lines and firing artillery and small-arms as he moved
ever-closer to the river bottom.18
All afternoon it rained. One Wisconsin soldier recalled, “Rain commenced to fall about
12 a.m., and poured incessantly all day and all night. I never saw it rain harder than it did
that night.”19 The chaplain of the 29th Arkansas described the weather as his regiment
marched for Jenkins’ Ferry: “A very black cloud was fast rising, coming from the northwest to meet us, and so with the thunder’s crash, and the lightning’s blinding flash – in
full march we pressed on through the falling torrent with the blackness of night around
us.”20
Steele knew his time was limited. He rushed the pontoon wagons ahead and before 4:30
p.m. on April 29 the India rubber bridge was in place across the Saline. Shortly afterward
wagons, artillery and cavalry began crossing.21 Getting the Union army through the
Saline bottoms in good weather would have been time consuming enough, doing it in
pouring rain with the Confederates nipping at its heels almost defies description. Jacob
Haas of the 9th Wisconsin described the scene at the river on the afternoon of April 29 in
his diary:
Fear and trembling was upon the faces of the white people and more so
upon those of the slaves who fled with us. We were in the morass and the
enemy upon us. We mudled [sic] on until we were in the deepest mud and
water and close to the swollen Saline River. We made Bivouk [sic] on a
small farm. With darknes [sic] the cannonade ceased. We had to wait until
under great difficulty the Pioneers made a bridge across the river. Then
our large train, artillery and all that could walk and crawl crossed the river.
Rain had been and was still pouring continually. We had slept a little lying
on fence-rails. We had nothing to eat and had marched 21 miles.22
18 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p.724.
19 Mark H. Knipping, A History of the 27th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry Regiment in the War of the
Rebellion, 1862-1865, http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/WI.She27thVol, 2001, p. 101.
20 “Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry Was Fought On April 30, 1864,” The Advocate (Fordyce, Arkansas), March 30,
1938. The article was written by Dr. J.M. Brown, Chaplain of 29th Arkansas and originally published in
1902.
21 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 669.
22 Jacob Haas Diary, unpublished manuscript in the possession of Michael Wilson of Broomfield,
Colorado.
16
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The small farm Jacob Haas mentions may well have been the unfinished house of John
Carver near the ferry. According to Carver’s Southern Claims Commission deposition
the Union engineer dismantled his house and log kitchen and used the wood to build the
pontoon bridge.23
Skirmishing continued until nightfall. As Steele’s army disappeared into the bottom,
Engelmann ordered Lieutenant Colonel Adolph Dengler to take two guns of the
Springfield Light Artillery and his regiment, the 43rd Illinois, and hold “. . . the last part
of the high ground before the road enters the Saline bottom.”24 This ground is just below
the high ridge where Jane Jenkins’ house stood and near a cleared field that Jenkins and
her son-in-law John M. Carver probably planted. This was the last Union line on April 29.
By the time Dengler deployed his men it was getting dark. Confederate cavalry pushed
ahead and tested the Union line and determined it too strong to carry and withdrew. The
battle in the Saline bottom would wait until the next day. During the night, the 33rd Iowa
relieved Dengler’s regiment. Both sides got what sleep
they could in the ceaseless rain blowing across the
battlefield.25
THE BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY,
APRIL 30, 1864
Brigadier General Frederick Salomon (Figure 12)
was charged with holding the Confederates with
his infantry while the Union cavalry, artillery, and
wagons crossed the river. On April 29, while the
rearguard engaged and occupied the Confederates,
Salomon assessed the terrain and decided to redeploy
his command. He pulled back, out of the range of the
Confederate artillery, and placed the infantry between
a slough on the east—his left flank—and Cox Creek
Figure 12:
Brig. Gen. Frederick Salomon, U.S.
23 Deposition of John M. Carver, Claimant, Claim No. 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 6-7.
24 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p.730.
25 A.F. Sperry, History of the 33D Iowa Infantry Volunteer Regiment, 1863-6, University of Arkansas
Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 1999, pp. 97-98; Clement A. Evans, editor, Confederate Military History,
Vol. 9: Missouri, Confederate Publishing Company, Atlanta, Georgia, 1899, p. 166 and O.R., Series I,
Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 730. In many accounts the aforementioned Jenkins’ field is called Jiles’ field and
the 1864 map drawn by Capt. R.M. Venable labels it Wilder’s field. Members of the Friends of Jenkins’
Ferry Battlefield have conducted a great deal of deed research that determined who in 1864 owned the land
associated with the cleared fields. While this research helps pin down who owned the land in 1864, it will
only add to the confusion on the part of historians researching the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry in the future. See
Chapter 2 for a detailed account.
17
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
on the west—his right flank. The movement shortened the Union line and forced the
Confederates to attack within a narrow, flooded space, which negated their numerical
superiority.26
Salomon could not have chosen a better defensive position. Two days of rain and a twomile long supply train had rutted the road into the bottom. The rain saturated the ground,
leaving the bottom filled with standing water. Salomon located his line along a slight rise
in the bottom, which gave his men the advantage of holding in a relatively dry area while
forcing the Confederates to attack through the mud
and water, breaking the momentum of their assaults.27
Once the two sides disengaged the night of April 29,
Colonel Cyrus Mackey (Figure 13), commander of
the 33rd Iowa, brought his regiment forward to relieve
the 43rd Illinois in the rear of Steele’s army. Mackey
reported that his men were within “speaking distance”
of the enemy. The colonel pulled his regiment off
the ridge and placed most of the men on the edge
of the Jenkins/Carver field to the north. Here they
would remain
until Brigadier
General Samuel
Rice (Figure 14)
rode to the rear
of Steele’s army
Figure 13: Col. Cyrus Mackay, U.S.
and ordered them
to move further
north. The gray light of day was just filtering through
the forest canopy as the wet, hungry Iowans began
to shift position. Brig. Gen. John S. Marmaduke
ordered Col. Colton Greene to push forward and
determine the strength of the enemy. On a wet April
30, Greene’s Missouri cavalry opened the battle of
Jenkins’ Ferry.28
Figure 14: Brig. Gen. Samuel Rice, U.S.
26 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 689.
27 Joe Walker, Harvest of Death: The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, Arkansas, N.P., 2011, pp. 64-65.
28 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, pp.702 and 829.
18
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Greene pushed the 3rd and 4th Missouri cavalry off the ridge and into the bottom. The
Missourians encountered the 33rd Iowa’s skirmishers, drove them in, and initiated a
general engagement. As the Iowans fell back Rice brought up the 50th Indiana and
formed a new line, slowing the Confederate advance while he created a second line
in the belt of trees beyond a cleared field owned by the Dortch family. Rice’s first line
hammered away at Col. Greene’s Missourians and slowly withdrew to the new line that
Rice had established north of the Dortch field. When the 33rd Iowa and 50th Indiana
reached the second line Rice’s brigade opened a heavy fire on Greene’s two cavalry
regiments. This was enough for the Missourians, who retreated back to the swale upon
realizing that they were no match for a Union infantry brigade (Figure 15).29
Rice at last had his men in the place he wanted them. He sent two of Engelmann’s
regiments and the 33rd Iowa to the rear to get what breakfast they could and arranged his
defensive line. The 27th Wisconsin replaced the 33rd Iowa. He lined up the 50th Indiana,
9th Wisconsin and the 29th Iowa in the trees just beyond the Dortch field. Captain
Edward Ruegger of the 9th Wisconsin recalled preparing for the Confederate assault:
We then retreated, formed the battle line at the end of the woods, and in
a short time we had a whole line of fortifications made out of old stumps,
fence rails and everything possible, close at hand. There we lay – awaiting
the oncoming enemy.30
Steele busied himself with getting his army across the river, leaving the defense of the
crossing to his subordinates. During the night Steele held a council of war and informed
Brig. Gen. Frederick Salomon that his division would take charge of the Union defense
in the Saline bottom. Salomon and Rice chose their positions and when Greene’s cavalry
arrived stopped its advance cold. On the brow of the ridge overlooking the Saline bottom,
Confederate generals Sterling Price, Edmund Kirby Smith and Thomas J. Churchill
conferred at what was probably Jane Jenkins’ house. At this point, about 7:30 a.m., it was
clear that Steele, while in full retreat, still had fight in him and that Greene’s cavalry was
no match for the Union infantry in the bottom. Churchill’s men had made a series of hard
29 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 697 and Walker, Harvest of Death, pp. 64 and 65. Note the
name Dortch is used here for the second cleared field behind which the Union army set up its main line
of defense. This field is unnamed on the 1864 Venable map. Bearss called it the Cooper field, which is
what General Sterling Price called it in his after-action report; Walker calls it the Groom field. Research
conducted by members of the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield has determined that this cleared field
was owned by Sigual A. Dortch in 1861. Again, future researchers are cautioned to read the accounts of the
battle carefully as the differing names given to the fields can be confusing.
30 Captain Edward Ruegger, “Five Weeks of My Army Life,” Wisconsin Magazine of History, Vol. 37,
Number 3, Spring 1954, p.167.
19
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 15: April 30, 1864 - Col. Colton Greene’s attack.
20
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
marches from Camden to the edge of the Saline bottom. Wet, tired and hungry, they had
just sat down to build fires when word came to move out.31
Kirby Smith missed his best chance of bagging Steele
when Fagan’s cavalry failed to cut off his retreat.
Now determined to push Steele into the Saline, Kirby
Smith threw Churchill’s Division into the fight.
Brigadier General James C. Tappan (Figure 16) pulled
one company out of each regiment in his brigade
as reserve and then Lieutenant Colonel William R.
Hardy’s 19th/24th Arkansas Infantry (Consolidated),
Colonel Robert Shaver’s 27th/38th Arkansas Infantry
(Consolidated), and Colonel Hiram Grinstead’s 33rd
Arkansas Infantry moved down the ridge into the
bottom.32
The weather continued as it had the day before―it
rained. Tappan’s brigade passed through the timber on
the north edge of the Jenkins/Carver field and into the
Dortch field, where they struggled through mud and water toward the Union line. Tappan
had Hardy on the left, Shaver on the right, and Grinstead in the rear. The infantry passed
through Col. Greene’s thin skirmish line, dividing the cavalry in two, and continued
toward the tree line on the edge of the field.33
Figure 16:
Brig. Gen. James C. Tappan, C.S.
Hardy and Shaver pushed in the Union skirmishers and charged to the edge of the field,
where they were met by a terrific volley of musket fire. Several accounts mention that the
lead elements of Tappan’s brigade were dressed in Union uniforms, some mention they
were driving sheep. The Confederates hoped this ruse would fool the Union soldiers but it
fooled no one. An Arkansas soldier described the assault on the Union line:
“. . . [W]hen we had got in thirty paces of the edge of the timber a
destructive fire was opened up on us from a solid line of the enemy posted
behind trees and logs in the edge of the timber.”34
31 Ruegger, “Five Weeks of My Army Life,” p.167; Forsyth, The Camden Expedition of 1864, p. 157 and
O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 801.
32 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 801.
33 Silas Claborn Turnbo, History of the Twenty-Seventh Arkansas Confederate Infantry, Arkansas Research,
Conway, Arkansas, 1988, p. 187.
34 Turnbo, History of the Twenty-Seventh Arkansas Confederate Infantry, p. 187.
21
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Tappan’s two consolidated regiments stalled in the face of the Union brigade.35
After a 20-minute delay, he called Grinstead forward. The 33rd Arkansas, without
skirmishers in front, charged the Union line. The maneuver spelled disaster.36 A
Wisconsin soldier recalled the attack:
Our entire Brigade soon was in line and under increasing fire. The rebels
came closer. Now they were in strong numbers on the small clearing
and came closer every second. The rolling of the guns sounded like a
continuous thunderstorm.37
The 33rd Arkansas went into the engagement with over 200 men. As a result of the attack
they lost nearly half their strength. including Col. Grinstead. Regimental surgeon Dr. J.N.
Bragg remembered the assault:
Two-hundred and twenty men could not last long before an army corps,
after a few minutes trial, with the loss of ninety-two killed and wounded,
including Col. Grinstead shot dead. The regiment fell back in disorder.38
Tappan’s battered brigade fell back to a swale behind a slight rise that crossed the field
and called for support. From there the Confederates continued firing at the Union line.
Tappan had been in combat with Salomon’s line for 45 minutes before Hawthorne’s
Brigade arrived on the field.39
After Tappan’s initial assault Rice shuffled his troops. Fearing that the Confederates
would try to turn his right flank by placing men west of Cox Creek, Rice moved
two companies of the 29th Iowa along with a detachment of casuals under Captain
Marmaduke Darnell, 43rd Indiana, to the west side of the creek to protect his flank.40
35 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p.802; Bearss, Steele’s Retreat From Camden, p. 124 and Walker,
Harvest of Death, pp. 70-71.
36 Dr. J.N. Bragg, “The Battle of Jenkins Ferry,” in M.A. Elliott, The Garden of Memory: Stories of the
Civil War as told by Veterans and Daughters of the Confederacy, reprint edition, The Hurley Co., Inc.,
Camden, Arkansas, 1976, p. 12.
37 Jacob Haas Diary.
38 Bragg, “The Battle of Jenkins Ferry,” p. 13.
39 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 802.
40 Bearss, Steele’s Retreat From Camden, p. 126. “Casuals” apparently refers to men who had been with
Steele’s Second Brigade but who were, for one reason or another, not at Marks’ Mill where many of the
43rd Iowa were killed, wounded or captured.
22
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 17: April 30, 1864 - Assault by Tappan’s Brigade.
23
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
In the lull, Colonel Robert Shaver reformed his 27th/38th Arkansas and hit the 50th
Illinois, which was on the end of the Union line. At first the Arkansas troops made
headway, pushing the Union line and nearly flanking it. To plug the gap Rice ordered
the 33rd Iowa, who had moved into the cleared field closer to the river to eat breakfast,
forward. The Iowans threw their weight into the
fight and the two regiments overwhelmed 27th/38th
Arkansas and Shaver fell back (Figure 17).41
Brigadier General Thomas J. Churchill (Figure
18) called up his second brigade, having thrown
his first at the Union line without making much
headway. Brigadier General Alexander T.
Hawthorne commanding the 29th, 34th and 35th
Arkansas infantry regiments, followed Tappan’s
line of march, coming off the ridge and crossing
the Jenkins/Carver field and then marching into the
Dortch field, where they passed through Tappan’s
Brigade, which had sought shelter in the swale
behind the low rise. Hawthorne threw his command
at the Union line with the same result as Tappan.42
Figure 18:
Brig. Gen. Thomas J. Churchill, C.S.
When Hawthorne’s Brigade pushed into the Saline bottom, Kirby Smith sent a regiment
of dismounted cavalry across Cox Creek. The cavalry was commanded by Lieutenant
Colonel H.G.P. Williams, formerly of General Dockery’s Brigade. Williams crossed
the creek where he encountered the small detachment of soldiers Rice had placed there.
Williams’ men overwhelmed the Union soldiers, pushing them north and threatening the
Union flank (Figure 19).43
Lieut. Col. Williams reported, “I had moved about 1,000 yards when my skirmishers
engaged those of the enemy, and my line continued to advance, the engagement soon
became general.”44 Williams’ advance posed a real threat to Salomon’s line. Realizing
the danger, Brig. Gen. Rice ordered additional troops across the swollen creek. Two
companies of the 40th Iowa, the 43rd Illinois and two companies of the 2nd Kansas, an
African American regiment, plunged into the waist deep water, formed lines, and met
41 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, pp. 805and 703 and Walker, Harvest of Death, pp. 75-76.
42 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, pp. 800 and 802 and Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, pp. 158-159.
43 Bearss, Steele’s Retreat From Camden, p. 130 and O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 808.
44 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 808.
24
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 17: April 30, 1864 - Assault by Hawthorne’s Brigade.
25
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Williams.45
Williams succeeded in reaching the Union right flank. The 9th Wisconsin received fire
from across the creek and one company turned and fired a volley at the men plaguing
them. As the Wisconsin regiment fired two companies of the 2nd Kansas crossed the
creek and joined in the fight. Jacob Haas of the 9th Wisconsin described the action in his
diary:
Then without command our company A turned and fired into the dark
timber from where the bullets came. Some said they were our troups [sic]
but we did not believe it. Soon we heard command, saw the rebels and
now strong firing ensued from both sides. The rebs made ready to come
across the ditch, when suddenly the negroes came to our aid. Part of the
negroes crossed the ditch and met the rebels. These now fled persued [sic]
by the colored soldiers.46
The reinforced Union line proved too strong for Williams. He withdrew and crossed to
the east side of the creek. Williams’ foray west of Cox Creek was Kirby Smith’s only
attempt to flank the Union right.47
Hawthorne’s role in the engagement is clouded by confusing and absent reports.
Regardless of the spin put on the action in the after-action reports by the Confederate
commanders, nothing changed the fact that Churchill bogged down. Hawthorne’s assault
into the Saline bottom failed to dislodge Salomon. Now, after several hours of fighting,
the whole of Churchill’s Division was mired behind the swale in the Dortch field. It
had been a hard day and it was not yet noon. Both sides described the fighting as fierce.
Churchill called it “desperate and beyond description.”48 A soldier in the 27th Wisconsin
wrote “The fighting on the right and centre was now dreadful; a continual roar of
musketry.”49
The Union line held against everything that Brig. Gen. Thomas J. Churchill threw at
them. The Union soldiers, who had endured defeats at Poison Spring and Marks’ Mill and
the long retreat from Camden, had gained confidence. Probably for the first time since
they had deployed in the Saline bottom, the Union soldiers believed they might defeat
45 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 725.
46 Jacob Haas Diary.
47 Richards, “The Camden Expedition,” p. 127.
48 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 800.
49 Knipping, A History of the 27th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry Regiment, p. 109.
26
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
their foe.
When Churchill bogged down, Gen. Sterling Price
ordered Brigadier General Mosby M. Parsons’ division
of Missourians forward (Figure 20). This time the
Confederates took artillery with them in hopes of
breaking the stubborn Union line. Price ordered Parsons
to take a position on Churchill’s right and advance
on the Union line. As Parsons began to deploy he
encountered Churchill, who desperately needed help on
the left and center. Parsons gave him Brigadier General
John B. Clark’s brigade and moved the brigade under
Colonel Simon Burns to the Confederate right. Colonel
Figure 20:
Lucien C. Gause’s Arkansas brigade, which had only
Brig. Gen. Mosby Parsons, C.S.
been marginally engaged in Hawthorne’s assault, filled
the gap between Clark and Burns in the center of Parsons’ line.50
An hour after Parsons arrived on the ridge overlooking the Jenkins/Carver field, the
infantry and artillery began to move. Lesueur’s and Ruffner’s batteries accompanied
Parsons’. Captain A.A. Lesueur brought his artillery, two 6-pounder and two 12-pounder
howitzers, down the muddy and rutted military road. He positioned the guns to aid the
Confederate right, but the mud made it difficult to operate them. When, after firing only
fifteen rounds, his infantry support abandoned him, Lesueur wisely withdrew to the high
ground above the Jenkins/Carver field. Captain S.T. Ruffner was not so lucky.51
At first the artillery was effective—at least one portion of the Confederate line drew
within 100 feet of Rice’s line. As the newly reinforced attack began to make headway,
Salomon brought up his reserves. Parts of Engelmann’s Brigade and Brig. Gen. John M.
Thayer’s Frontier Division came forward. With the redeployment Rice had the 29th Iowa
and the 9th Wisconsin on the right, reinforced by the 2nd Kansas. The center of the Union
line was held by the 50th Indiana and the 33rd Iowa, reinforced by the 1st Arkansas.
On the Union left were the 12th Kansas and the 27th Wisconsin, reinforced by the 14th
Kansas.52
As Parsons’ Confederates moved into the bottom some of Churchill’s regiments, who had
50 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, pp. 782, 808 and 806.
51 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 816.
52 Forsyth, The Camden Expedition, pp. 162-163 and Bearss, Steele’s Retreat From Camden, pp. 134-135.
27
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
exhausted their ammunition, began to pull out. As the 38th Arkansas walked back to the
ridgeline, their commander, Col. R.G. Shaver, watched Parsons’ command push around
his depleted regiment. The Union line had been stabilized, resupplied and strengthened
in the lull between the end of Churchill’s assault and Parsons’. The influx of fresh Union
troops proved pivotal in the next phase of the battle.53
Parsons’ Confederates encountered evidence of the battle as they arrived in the Dortch
field. The wet field, rutted by wagons and the constant movement of men, slowed the
march. An officer in an Arkansas regiment that was pulling out of the bottom described
the assault:
When the Missourians passed into the fight, the roar of small arms was
renewed and the noise of the reports of the guns from both sides was
deafening and the battle ground was enveloped with smoke.54
By the time Parsons’ attack was underway all of Steele’s army except the infantry and
one section of artillery had crossed the Saline River on the pontoon bridge. While that
was good news, Steele could not withdraw his infantry while under the pressure from
Kirby Smith’s veterans. In order to successfully withdraw, the Union infantry had to
defeat the Confederates.55
Rice and Salomon now controlled the Saline bottom. The Confederates had been
removed from the west side of Cox Creek. The Union soldiers west of the creek could
now turn their firepower into the flanks of any Confederate line that advanced through the
Dortch field. Three Union regiments held the gap between the slough and the field. The
main Union line consisted of eight regiments stacked two deep and it was into this battletested line that Parsons’ Missourians headed.
Brig. Gen. John B. Clark’s brigade on the Confederate right ran into trouble. As he
pushed past the swale his line came under fire from Union solders west of Cox Creek
and from the main Union line behind the makeshift breastworks. Clark reported, “. . .
[M]y front was perfectly naked of any protection for my command in its advance upon
the enemy, and the whole face of the open ground swept by heavy front and flank fires
from the enemy’s lines . . .”56 Clark, hoping to charge across the Dortch field and into the
Union barricade, hit a wall of lead.
53 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 805.
54 Turnbo, History of the Twenty-seventh Arkansas Confederate Infantry, p. 192.
55 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 677.
56 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 811.
28
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The Confederate artillery that came in with Parsons found the going tough. The
condition of roads slowed the advance and hindered the movement of the guns. Early
in the fight Capt. A.A. Lesueur withdrew, leaving Capt. S.T. Ruffner’s three guns the
only Confederate artillery on the field. Earlier, Ruffner had abandoned one of his guns
as it became stuck in the muddy bottom. The Confederate artillery was less than 200
yards from the Union line, and though in canister range it was in a precarious position.
Colonel Samuel Crawford of the 2nd Kansas sent a courier to Brig. Gen. Rice asking for
permission to charge the battery. Rice agreed, sending both the 2nd Kansas and the 29th
Iowa.57
The Union regiments on the right opened fire on the Confederate artillery. The 9th
Wisconsin and the 2nd Kansas fired volleys at Ruffner’s gunners, bringing down horses
and men. Some reports say that the infantry fled, leaving the artillerymen alone to face
the Union assault. The 2nd Kansas fixed bayonets and the whole Union line surged
forward. The Kansas regiment, all the while yelling “Remember Poison Spring!”
overwhelmed the battery. The weight of the two infantry regiments proved too much for
the Confederate right, which held for about thirty minutes before retiring.58
The scene at the Confederate guns was one of carnage. The enraged soldiers of the 2nd
Kansas exacted revenge for what the Confederates had inflicted upon their sister regiment
at Poison Spring. Fifty years later Col. Crawford recalled, “. . . in passing the battery
the bayonet was freely used . . .” Contemporary Confederate reports echoed Crawford’s
recollections. Crawford unapologetically told a captured Confederate officer what his
men had done and why. As long as the Confederate government refused to treat black
Union soldiers as prisoners of war his men would reciprocate in kind. The brutality
between Confederates and United States Colored Troops in the Trans-Mississippi would
continue to escalate as the war went on (Figure 21).59
Colonel Simon P. Burns’ brigade on the Confederate right made more headway, hitting
the Union skirmishers and pushing them back into their main line. One observer reported
that “The firing began to get farther away, and it was evident that the Missourians were
57 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 812 and Walker, Harvest of Death, pp. 90-92.
58 Ruegger, “Five Weeks of My Army Life,” p. 168; A.A. Stuart, Iowa Colonels and Regiments: Being
a History of Iowa Regiments in the War of the Rebellion, Mills & Co., Des Monies, Iowa, 1865, p. 451;
Samuel J. Crawford, Kansas in the Sixties, reprint edition, Kansas Heritage Press, Ottawa, Kansas, 1994, p.
124 and O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 811.
59 Crawford, Kansas in the Sixties, p. 124 and Walker, Harvest of Death, pp. 94-96.
29
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 21: April 30, 1864 - Assault of Gen. Mosby M. Parsons’ Missouri Brigade.
30
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
rolling the tide of battle back.”60 The momentum of the Confederate assault hit the
33rd Iowa and the 12th Kansas, driving them back in a panic. Col. Cyrus Mackey of
the 33rd Iowa was wounded and forced from the field and Major Cyrus Boydston took
command. For perhaps the first time that day the Union line was in disarray.61 Colonel
John A. Garrett of the 40th Iowa reported, “So many of our engaged line were retreated in
disorder and haste.”62
Garrett’s regiment and Colonel Conrad Krez of the 27th Wisconsin were ordered to fill
the gap on the Union left caused by the retreat. The fighting in the bottom had become
general as Parsons’ Missourians made an all-out effort to break the Union line and
destroy Steele’s army. One Wisconsin soldier reported, “Several charges were made and
each time the rebs were driven back with great slaughter.”63 Another wrote, “Bullets
whizzed around us and mud splashed over us. Our men feared we would all be killed but
as far as I know only one was seriously wounded.”64
At last Parsons’ men reached their limit and the line of Missouri troops were pushed back.
When the Confederates on the left and center began to fall back Price ordered Parsons
to pull back and regroup. At that point Brig. Gen. Samuel Rice seized the initiative and
attacked, pushing the Confederates back another 300 yards. After fighting all morning
Churchill and Parsons had gained nothing. Neither Confederate attack had enough weight
to break the Union line, and each time they threatened a Union flank Salomon managed
to find men to fill the gap and restore the line.65
But the Confederates were not done. At long last the Texas division arrived. They had
marched up the military road past the devastation of the previous day, past trees damaged
by artillery and small arms, downed fences, clothing and other accouterments scattered
along the road side—sure signs they had at long last caught up with Steele. Major
General John G. Walker’s Division had marched 240 miles since leaving Pleasant Hill,
Louisiana, on April 10 (Figure 22).66
60 Bragg, “The Battle of Jenkins Ferry,” p.13.
61 Sperry, History of the 33D Iowa Infantry, p. 105.
62 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 740.
63 Knipping, History of the 27th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry Regiment, p. 109.
64 Jacob Haas Diary.
65 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 690.
66 Joseph Palmer Blessington, The Campaigns of Walker’s Texas Division, reprint edition, State House
Press, Austin, Texas, 1994, p. 248 and Evans, Confederate Military History, Chapter XIV, p. 135.
31
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Prior to Walker’s assault the Confederates had discovered
a second road leading into the Saline River bottom. They
hoped, though it seemed that no one examined the road,
that it would bring two of Walker’s brigades into the
battlefield behind the Union line. It did not. The road along
which Brigadier General Horace Randel and Brigadier
General William R. Scurry’s brigades marched was called
“Old Cunningham Road” on the 1864 Venable map. On a
good day it led to the ferry. On a bad day, and April 30 was
a very bad day, it led to the slough, where Gen. Salomon’s
Union soldiers waited. If anything, Walker’s attack faired
worse than all the rest.67
Figure 22:
Maj. Gen. John G. Walker, C.S.
As Randel’s and Scurry’s soldiers made their way down “Old Cunningham Road,”
Brigadier General Thomas N. Waul brought his brigade off the ridge and into the bottom,
following the well worn route established earlier in the day. Waul arrived first, sending
his skirmishers ahead, where they met the Union soldiers in the Dortch field. The
skirmishers drove the federals back to the line in the woods on the edge of the field. Waul
stopped to assess the situation, and what he saw he did not like.
They had also a strong force nearly at right angles with the right of their
main line, in position under the high banks of a deep bayou that skirts the
Jenkins’ Ferry road, directly on the edge of the field and commanding the
left flank, and enfilading any force that might enter the field in front of the
main line. The enemy’s left extended a considerable distance beyond the
field, forming an obtuse angle, inclining toward our right and commanding
a large portion of the field.68
Waul advanced and his brigade was caught in a storm of small-arms fire. The Union
soldiers across Cox Creek and behind the breastworks unleashed fire that staggered the
Texans. Parsons and Churchill advanced from the rear in support of Walker’s Division.
Parsons somehow managed to get around Waul’s right and found no one to fight.
Burns’ brigade of Parson’s Division engaged the enemy. As the fighting progressed in
the front, Scurry and Randel emerged from the Confederate right much further to the
east than anyone expected. As the Texans tried to rearrange their lines all three brigade
67 Richard Lowe, Walker’s Texas Division C.S.A.: Greyhounds of the Trans-Mississippi, Louisiana State
University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 2004, pp. 221-222.
68 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 817.
32
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
commanders were shot. Scurry and Randel were mortally wounded and confusion
ensued.69
During the initial assault by the Texans Brig. Gen. Samuel Rice, who along with Brig.
Gen. Frederick Salomon had tactical command of Steele’s rearguard, was wounded. As
he rode toward the front he was shot in the ankle and left the field. The bullet forced part
of his spur into his leg. The wound proved fatal and he died in Iowa on July 6, 1864.70
For another hour the Texans and the rest of the Confederate army slugged it out with
Steele’s rearguard. As had been the case all morning long, the stubborn Union soldiers
would not be moved. Kirby Smith’s Texans, like his Arkansans and Missourians, had
failed. At noon Salomon decided to pull out. Steele approved Salomon’s plan and the
retreat resumed. The Confederates simply let Steele slip away. The fight was out of them
(Figure 23).71
Salomon carried out the wounded who could be moved and left the rest in a house on the
west edge of the northernmost cleared field. The house had been used as a field hospital
all day and the Union surgeons stayed at their patients’ sides, where they were later
captured by the Confederates. Captain J.B. Wheeler, Steele’s chief engineer, reported
that by 2:05 p.m. all of the infantry had crossed the pontoon bridge. He held it open
for another 45 minutes, allowing walking wounded and stragglers to cross. Then under
orders from Steele, Wheeler destroyed the bridge.72
The Venable map shows two houses in the Tucker field: the Widow Tucker House,
perhaps the home of Mary Ann Tucker, and one simply labeled Enemy hospital. It is
unclear if there were actually two houses in the bottom. Years later, Mary Ann Tucker
remembered that her house had been a hospital and that Union soldiers were left there for
several weeks after the battle. She also recalled that she and Lucinda Carver cooked for
the wounded men while they were at her house (Figure 24).73
The Union army climbed into the bottom on the north side of the Saline River. The road
on the south side of the river was bad, but the road on the north side was worse. Capt
69 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, pp.817 and 810 and Lowe, Walker’s Texas Division C.S.A., pp. 225226.
70 Chapman Brothers, Portrait and Biographical Album of Mahaska County, Iowa, Chapman Brothers,
Chicago, Illinois, 1887, p. 271.
71 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 690.
72 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 690 and 677.
73 Deposition of Mary Ann Tucker in Claim No. 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 30.
33
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 23: April 30, 1864 - Assault of Walker’s Texas Division.
34
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Wheeler wrote “[T]hose 2 miles surpass
any that I have ever seen, and from the
absence of small timber and brushwood
it was difficult to repair [the road]. . . ”74
Wheeler made do; he broke up wagons
for wood to corduroy the road and the
exhausted men pushed the rest out of the
bottom. Steele sent his cavalry ahead to
Little Rock for supplies. His soldiers,
Figure 24: Detail of Venable map. (Red circle marks
who had fought all day with little to eat,
the houses on the map).
needed rations. A Wisconsin captain
wrote “On the other side of the river we went in bivouac and shortly fell asleep – some
dreaming of better times, no doubt.”75
On April 30, the army’s wagons stopped about 2.5 miles north of the river. That night,
his animals worn out from the long march and lack of forage, Steele ordered all of the
wagons burned “. . . except those attached to the different headquarters, the ammunition,
and the ambulances . . .”76 A Union soldier wrote, “The road was full of wagons, animals,
boxes; full of good things, wagons full of old and new uniforms, barrels of coffee and
many other things.”77
Steele’s army, like all Union armies marching through Arkansas, had been joined by
a number of Freedom Seekers, which the army called Contraband. Steele sent the
ambulances and wagons carrying wounded and Contraband to Pine Bluff. The city
provided access to the Arkansas River, and it was a route that the Confederates would be
unlikely to follow.78
On the south side of the river, the Confederates faced the task of dealing with the
casualties of the battle. For two days, soldiers gathered the dead and wounded. Dr.
William M. McPheeters, a surgeon with Sterling Price’s command, visited the Union
field hospital where he found 100 wounded men. He then coordinated the removal of
the wounded from the field and returned to the hospital, where he worked into the night
74 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 678.
75 Ruegger, “Five Weeks of My Army Life,” p. 168.
76 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 681.
77 Jacob Haas Diary.
78 O.R., Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 670.
35
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
performing amputations.79
Burial details moved across the Saline bottom, where wet conditions made gathering the
dead and burying them challenging. The height of the water table would have made burial
difficult at best and almost impossible in the conditions the Confederates faced. One
soldier recalled seeing new graves that looked like islands in the water. Others reported
seeing bloated unburied corpses in the bottom. No doubt the Confederates did what they
could before they withdrew to Tulip on May 2, 1864. The Union dead were removed
from the battlefield in 1868 and reburied at Little Rock National Cemetery. Those
Confederates buried in the bottom remain there in unmarked graves.80
Both sides claimed victory. Technically the Confederates won; they held the field and
the Union army retreated. But, as the Union army had planned to retreat, it was a hollow
victory. The Confederates lost 1,000 killed, wounded and missing of the approximately
6,000 men engaged. The Union army had about 4,000 men in the bottoms; they lost
approximately 700 killed, wounded and missing.81
The failure of the Camden Expedition on the part of the Union army was due to poor
planning by commanding Maj. Gen. Frederick Steele, who left Little Rock without
enough supplies for his column. Steele was reluctant to undertake the expedition; he
knew what to expect and probably knew that he would be unable to find supplies in
the field. The Confederates had the opportunity to destroy Steele’s army once it had
retreated to Camden, and then again while en route from Camden to Little Rock. Their
failure is perhaps more significant than the Union failure in the Red River Campaign
and the Camden Expedition. The failure of the Red River Campaign was due to the poor
leadership of Maj. Gen. Nathaniel Banks. His well equipped army failed to defeat the
Confederates at Mansfield and then, when it secured a victory at Pleasant Hill, Banks
retreated. After Pleasant Hill, Kirby Smith took Major General Richard Taylor’s infantry
to Arkansas, which kept Taylor from pursuing Banks and denied him the opportunity to
catch and destroy Banks’ army.
Had either of the Union armies been destroyed, the resulting outcry in the North, both
among the populace and the press, would have been monumental. A crushing defeat such
79 Cynthia DeHaven Pitcock and Bill Gurley, editors, I acted from principle: The Civil War Diary of Dr.
William M. McPheeters, Confederate Surgeon in the Trans-Mississippi, University of Arkansas Press,
Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2002, p. 151
80 Lowe, Walker’s Texas Division C.S.A, p. 227; Pitcock et. al., I acted from principle, p. 152 and Walker,
Harvest of Death, p. 123.
81 Barry Popchock, Soldier Boy: The Civil War Letters of Charles O. Musser, 29 Iowa, University of Iowa
Press, Iowa City, Iowa, 1995, p. 123.
36
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
as the loss of Little Rock or the loss of a major field army or armies might have caused
serious problems for the Lincoln administration. The Union command might have been
forced to shift troops from Georgia to regain control of Arkansas, and Union Louisiana
would have been threatened if Banks had been destroyed.
Because of the chronic shortage of soldiers, the Confederacy could not hope to
overwhelm the Union armies in the Trans-Mississippi. Kirby Smith took a calculated
risk when he took Richard Taylor’s infantry out of Louisiana to try to crush Steele. The
gamble failed, and though the Confederates won some battles and saved Shreveport they
failed to make any significant change in the strategic situation in the Trans-Mississippi.
The influx of former slaves into the United States Colored Troops bolstered Union
manpower and drained that of the Confederacy. The Union could afford to maintain the
status quo, the Confederacy could not. Confederate forces, empowered by the victories
of the Camden Campaign, took the offensive in the summer of 1864, raiding plantations
and other Union installations in eastern Arkansas disrupting the Union supply line. These
small-scale operations proved successful but did not break the Union strongholds at
Helena, Pine Bluff, Little Rock or DeValls Bluff. Sterling Price’s disastrous Missouri
Raid in the fall of 1864 spelled the end of any real hope for the Confederates in the TransMississippi.
Photograph credits: All photos Mudpuppy &Waterdog, Inc. except p. 9: Nathaniel Banks, Library of
Congress; p. 11: Sterling Price, Alabama Department of Archives and History; p. 12: Edmund Kirby Smith,
University of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee; p. 13: James F. Fagan, Butler Center for Arkansas Studies, Little Rock, Arkansas; p. 17: Frederick Salomon, Kent Salomon, Manitowoc, Wisconsin; p. 18: Cyrus Mackay,
Roger Davis, Keokuk, Iowa; p. 21: James C. Tappan, Phillips County Museum, Helena, Arkansas; p. 27:
Mosby M. Parsons, Wilson’s Creek National Battlefield.
37
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE CLEARED FIELDS
38
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE CLEARED FIELDS IN THE SALINE BOTTOM
INTRODUCTION
In 1864, there were three or four cleared field in Saline bottom. These fields were east of
Military Road arranged north to south along the road and each was separated from the
other by a tree line. These fields are defining features of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
The southern most field is where the engagement on April 29, 1864 ended and where the
engagement of April 30, 1864 began. Both sides marched through this field to get into the
Saline bottom.
The second field, that is the field just north of the first, is where most of the fighting
occurred on April 30. The Union main line was in a belt of trees just north of the field and
the almost all of the Confederate assaults on that line traversed the field.
The field or fields north of the second field were used as a staging areas for Union troops.
Prior to the battle during the early morning hours of April 30, 1864, a structure near one
of the fields was used as Gen. Frederick Steele’s headquarters and it was here that the
strategy for the upcoming battle was developed. This same structure or perhaps another
nearby structure was used as a hospital.
All of these fields are within the Core Area of the battlefield. The Core Area is the area
of the battlefield where the combat occurred. The fields have erroneously been called
battlefields. As noted above these cleared agricultural fields are part of the cultural
landscape that make up the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield. Knowing the position of these fields
within the Saline bottom is important to understanding how the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry
was fought.
For the Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield who owned these fields at the time of the
battle is important. It is not germane to the understanding of the battle, but it’s important
to them, as they would like the names to be based on the historic record.
THE ISSUES
The only extant map of the battlefield from the period was drawn by Captain Richard
M. Venable (Figure 25). The map is dated April 30, 1864 and was likely drawn to
illustrate the after action reports that Lieut. Gen. Edmund Kirby Smith submitted to the
Confederate high command in Richmond, Virginia. There is no date on the map stating
when it was drawn, just the date of the engagement. After the battle the Confederates held
the field for a day. The Confederate army was regrouping, burying dead and caring for
wounded at that time a survey of the battlefield could have been made by an engineering
officer. It is unknown if Capt. Venable was with Kirby Smith’s army. What is likely is that
several officers drew maps that were part of their after action reports that are not now part
of the record. Any or all of these things could have been used to aid in the production of
this map.
39
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 25: The 1864 map drawn by Richard M. Venable.
What we do know about Capt. Richard M. Venable (Figure 26) is that he graduated from
Hampton-Sydney College and continued his studies at the University of Virginia. When
the war broke out he enlisted in Stanard’s Howitzer Battalion, Virginia Light Artillery.
As a private on April 26, 1861. He participated at the Battle of Big Bethel, the first land
40
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
battle of the war on June 25, 1861. He remained
with the artillery unit throughout 1861. In
1862, he sought and eventually received an
appointment with the Confederate Engineers
Corps. He passed the examination and was
promoted to lieutenant on May 19, 1862. In
June he was assigned to the Engineers Corps
and sometime there after he was ordered to the
Trans-Mississippi.1
On September 21, 1863, he was appointed
Chief of the Bureau of Topographical Engineers
for the District of West Louisiana and Arkansas.
At that time the headquarters of the department
was in Shreveport, Louisiana. When Venable
signed his parole on July 5, 1865 in Galveston,
Texas he held the rank of major. We know that
he drew many of the maps from the TransFigure 26: Richard Venable and other
Mississippi in the Jeremy Gilmer Collection at
Confederate officers (Venable is circled).
the University of North Carolina from which
the Jenkins’ Ferry map was obtained. Save the lack of bends in the Saline River and Cox
Creek the map appears to be accurate. However, the names on the agricultural fields do
not correspond with any of the known landowners in the area. The map does show the
location of a house behind the Union line labeled Widow Tucker.2
The Venable map was not found by researchers until recently and prior to its location the
best known and most used map was created by Edwin C. Bearss, Historian Emeritus of
the National Park Service, in 1961. Bearss had written on numerous battles and is perhaps
one of the nation’s best known and respected Civil War historians. Bearss’ book, Steele’s
Retreat From Camden & The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry published in 1961 was the first
serious study of the Camden Campaign and the battle. Bearss’ map on page 101 shows
three cleared fields labeled south to north Jiles, Cooper and Kelly (Figure 27).3
1 Michael E. Pilgrim, “A Different View on the War: The Civil War Diary of Richard M. Venable,”
Prologue, Quarterly of the National Archives and Records Administration, Winter 1996, Vol. 28, Number
4, pp. 264-265.
2 U.S. War Department, List of Staff Officers of the Confederate States Army, 1861-1865, Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1891, p. 170 and Richard M. Venable, Record Group 109, Combined
Services Records of Confederate Soldiers Who Served in Organization Raised Directly by the Confederate
Government, M258, Roll 0110, Military Unit: Engineers, CSA, T-Y. National Archives and Records
Administration.
3 See Edwin C. Bearss, Steele’s Retreat From Camden & The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, reprint edition, Eagle
Press of Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1990.
41
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 27: Edwin C. Bearss’ map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
42
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Since the publication of the Bearss book other studies of the campaign and/or the battle
have been done. Notably, Michael J. Forsyth’s The Camden Expedition of 1864 and the
Opportunity Lost by the Confederacy to Change the Civil War, McFarland & Company,
Inc., Jefferson, North Carolina, 2003 and Richard Lowe, Walker’s Texas Division C.S.A.:
Greyhounds of the Trans-Mississippi, Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, 2004. The maps in both of these books are based on Bearss’ 1961 map.
The latest monograph of the battle was written in 2011 by Joe Walker. Walker’s Harvest
of Death: The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry created a third map. Walker’s map appears to be a
recreation of the Venable map. The difference between Walker’s map and the 1864 map
is that Walker named the third field, which he labels Tucker Field. This field is unlabeled
on the Venable map, though it is in that field that Venable places the Widow Tucker house
(Figure 28).
The issue with the Bearss
and Venable maps is
not the placement or
the number of fields
along the road, but the
surnames attached to each
field. Since the 1970s
and possibly since the
publication of the Bearss
book descendants of the
families who lived in
the bottom in 1864 have
been trying to correctly
identify the owners of
those fields.
Figure 28: Joe Walker’s map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
The only mention of any
of the fields by name in
the after action reports,
which are printed in the
U.S. War Department
publication The War
of the Rebellion: The
Official Records of the
Union and Confederate
Armies, Series I, Vol.
XXXIV, Part I is
Cooper’s field. Maj. Gen.
43
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Sterling Price mentions it on page 782. None of the other 46 reports name any of the open
fields.
NAMING THE FIELDS
In 1979, M.J. Green, in a letter Dr. Michael Dougan, history professor at Arkansas State
University, offers some information on the landownership in the Saline bottom. Green
states that Jane Jenkins, a widow in 1864, lived in Section 14 and owned two houses that
were occupied by her extended family, which included sons-in-law John M. Carver and
Robert Hosea Carver. Green states that it was Robert Hosea Carver’s cornfield through
which the Confederate launched their attack on April 30, 1863. This is the field Bearss
calls the Jiles field. Green states that the Jiles Field should be labeled Jenkins or Carver.
He further states that Cooper Field should be Tucker. He is less emphatic about the Kelly
Field. Green does mention that a James Kelly owned property in Section 18 but he does
not think he lived there in 1864. He also notes that the Jiles family did buy part of the
Jenkins property but it was after the Civil War 4
It’s likely that a local contact provided Bearss with the names of the agricultural fields
when he was preparing his manuscript in 1960-61. The contact may have simply provided
information as he knew it and Bearss took that person at his word. As the fields are not
named in the Official Records and it appears that Bearss had not seen the Venable map,
that is the only logical conclusion. In fact, Bearss mentions in the Preface to his book that
Piece Reeder, the postmaster of Leola, provided him with battlefield guides. It is likely
that these guide or Reeder provided Bearss with the names.
The most recent work on the landownership was undertaken in 2013. Richard K. Jenkins
and Thomas Green of the Friends of Jenkins Ferry Battlefield examined land records
and census data to try and determine ownership of the fields. Using land patent records
and working with a local title company they determined that the names that should be
attached to the fields from south to north are: Jenkins/Kyle/Carver; Dortch and State of
Arkansas. In addition to census records and online land patents Green and Jenkins also
checked the Attorney’s Certificate of Land Patents, which were available at Stewart Title
of Arkansas in Sheridan, Arkansas.5
A claim by John M. Carver against the United States for damages to his property during
the Civil War sheds additional light on the agricultural fields. On January 16, 1878,
Carver filed a claim with the Southern Claims Commission for damages and loss of
property amounting to $1,070.00. In short Carver claimed that the Union army destroyed
two of his houses for use in constructing the pontoon bridge and “crosslaying” or
4 M.J. Green to Michael Dougan, February 5, 1979 and M.J. Green to Civil War Times Illustrated, July 1,
1984, copies in possession of the author.
5 “Resent research uncovers new information on ownership of battlefields at Jenkins’ Ferry,” The Sheridan
Headlight, March 27, 2013.
44
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
corduroying the road. As well as taking 18 beef cattle; 20 hogs; 400 pounds of bacon; 30
bushes of corn and 5,000 board feet of lumber.6
Carver stated that he lived “3½ miles south west of Jenkins Ferry in Tennessee Township
in Grant Co., Ark on the Little Rock and Camden roads.” Carver also stated that prior
to the outbreak of the Civil War he lived “3 miles North East of Jenkins Ferry. I was a
farmer, moved to my present residence in 1861, in 1864 after the Battle of Jenkins Ferry I
moved to Little Rock.”7 Carver stated that “. . . his plantation was 3½ miles South West of
Jenkins Ferry Grant Co. Ark 460 acres 30 acres in cultivation the remainder woodlands.”
Lucinda Carver, his wife and Jane Jenkins daughter, stated that John Carver earned a
portion of this property through his own labor and inherited a part from her mother.8
In April 1864, John Carver owned two houses on the banks of the Saline River at Jenkins
Ferry. One house was frame and was completed except for the chimney and the other log,
which was to be used as a kitchen. According to the witnesses, neither of the houses were
occupied at the time, though the Carver’s were storing bacon and corn on the premises.
According to Carver and the other witnesses, which included his wife Lucinda Carver,
Mary Ann Tucker and Jane Jenkins, Union soldiers dismantled the houses and used the
wood to build the pontoon bridge and/or for corduroying the road.9
In their depositions John M. Carver, Lucinda Carver, Jane Jenkins and Mary Ann Tucker
all make note that it was Mary Ann Tucker’s house that was used as Gen. Frederick
Steele’s headquarters and as the Union field hospital. John Carver and Jane Jenkins
mentioned it when he was discussing his hogs, which roamed as far as her house, which
he and his wife note was used as Gen. Steele’s headquarters.10
The mention of Tucker’s house as Steele’s headquarters is an important clue. The
Venable map, which is the only one to show house places an number scattered across the
battlefield. The are two houses on top of the ridge, these are likely the Jenkins/Carver
houses. There is a house in the southwest corner of the Wilder field (southern most field);
a house in the southwest corner of the Grooms field and two houses on both sides of
Military Road near the northwest corner of the unnamed field. The only named structures
6 John M. Carver (78910), M 1407, Southern Claims Commission, National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA).
7 Deposition of John M. Carver Claimant in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, p. 1.
8 Deposition of John M. Carver Claimant in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, p. 5 and
Deposition of Lucinda Carver Claimant in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, p. 11.
9 Deposition of John M. Carver Claimant in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 6-7;
Deposition of Lucinda J. Carver in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 13-15; Deposition
of Jane Jenkins in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 23-25 and Deposition of Mary Ann
Tucker in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 31-32.
10 Depositions of John M. Carver Claimant and Lucinda J. Carver; Jane Jenkins and Mary Ann Tucker in
Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp.7, 14, 24 and 30.
45
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
on the Venable map are Widow Tucker’s and Enemy Hospital here. A field hospital would
be by necessity close to the fighting, but it would not be in the middle of the fighting. Any
Union hospital would have to be behind the Union line, thus it could only be one of these
two houses, if we assume the map is correct. Even if we do not assume the map is correct
there are four witnesses that claim that Mary Tucker’s house was used as Gen. Steele’s
headquarters.
Mary Tucker states:
Yes I remember after the Battle of Jenkins Ferry the Union Hospital was
made in my house as my residence was about the center of the battlefield
the Union soldiers were left there several weeks myself and the claimant’s
wife [Lucinda Carver] prepared diet such as soup, milk, chicken and other
things they could eat. We never asked for or received any pay for it.11
All of the witnesses mention that Tucker’s house was used as headquarters and Tucker
goes a step further in stating that her house was also used as a hospital. Based on the
evidence that we have from the 1878 Southern Commission Claims record it appears
that Mary Ann Tucker was living in a house in the Saline bottom. We do not know if she
owned land, but she certainly seems to have been living there and she knew the Jenkins/
Carver family.
Based upon the evidence the fields in the Saline bottom should be named south to north:
Jenkins/Carver; Dortch and Tucker (Figure 29).
Photo Credits: p. 40 1864 Map of Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, Southern Historical Collection, University of
North Carolina and Fp. 41 Richard M. Venable, Bortz Library, Hampton-Sydney College.
11 Deposition of Mary Ann Tucker in Claim No 18910, Southern Claims Commission, pp. 30.
46
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 29: 2013 map of the fields in the Saline bottom.
47
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
KOCOA
48
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
KOCOA TERRAIN ANALYSIS
This chapter examines the defining military terrain features of the Battle of Jenkins’
Ferry utilizing KOCOA analysis, which examines tactical aspects of an area to identify
and classify important or defining terrain features. Features are classified as one or
more of the following: Key Terrain (K), Observation and Fields of Fire (O), Cover and
Concealment (C), Obstacles (O), and Avenues of Approach and Retreat (A). These
elements can be natural, such as rivers, ridges, lowlands and vegetation or cultural
in origin, such as roads, buildings and fortifications, and are defined by Latschar and
Fonzo:1
1) Key Terrain—Key terrain often includes high ground, natural barriers that help
with defense such as dense woods or rivers, and strategic points such as road
junctions and bridges. It is defined as “. . . any locality that affords a marked
advantage to whichever combatant seizes, retains and controls it.”
2) Observation and Fields of Fire—These two elements include only natural or
cultural landscape points that allow good observation of enemy movements,
good communication (such as a signal station) and the acquisition of enemy
targets. High ground such as hills and ridge tops, tall buildings, and approaches to
entrenched positions would be examples of important observation points.
3) Cover and Concealment—This includes natural or cultural landscape features
that provide protection from enemy fire (cover) and concealment from enemy
observation. Walls, buildings, dense woods, sunken roads, embankments, ravines,
and military entrenchments are examples of these features.
4) Obstacles—These are natural or man-made landscape elements that impede
the movement of military forces. Examples include rivers, walls, fences, dense
vegetation, swamps, steep slopes, ravines and fortifications.
5) Avenues of Approach and Retreat—These are natural or man-made corridors used
to transfer troops to and from the battle area. Roads were the main avenues of
approach and retreat during the Civil War, but railroads, navigable rivers, paths,
and creek beds also served as such.
In the analysis to follow, the defining terrain features associated with the April 30,
1 John Latschar, “Battlefield Rehabilitation at Gettysburg,” http://www.nps.gov/gett/parknews/gettbattlefield-rehab.htm, 2009, pp. 2-3 and Stephen Fonzo, Documentary and Landscape Analysis of the
Buckland Mills Battlefield (Va042), Buckland Preservation Society, Gainesville, Virginia, 2008.
49
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
1864, Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry will be examined and classified as one or more of the five
KOCOA elements. Modern U.S. Geological Survey maps and one Civil War-era map
will be used to identify the terrain features. Historic documents including the historic
map; and the modern battlefield survey suggest that the core battlefield is more or less
bisected by SR 46 and extends to the north just beyond the Saline River and to the south
just north of the corporate limits of Leola, Arkansas. On the west, the Core Area extends
approximately one-quarter to one-half mile beyond Cox Creek and on the east one-half
to one mile beyond AR 46. (Figure 30). These will be the boundaries of the battlefield for
this analysis, although relevant surrounding features will also be examined.
Figure 30: 2009 American Battlefield Protection Program map of the Jenkins’
Ferry battlefield.
50
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The one period map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield was drawn in 1864 by Capt. R.N.
Venable, C.S.A., a cartographic engineer with the District of Louisiana and Arkansas.2
The Venable map shows the defining battlefield features reported in the after-action
reports—the cleared fields where the fighting took place, the pontoon bridge, the military
road, Old Cunningham Road, Cox Creek, Saline River, the slough and several houses in
the battlefield area (Figure 31).
Figure 31: 1864 Venable map of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
Based on reconnaissance and interviews conducted by the author, the Venable map
appears to be accurate. Traces of the military road survive, and local informants have
2 Jenkins’ Ferry Map, Gilmer Civil War Maps Collection, Southern Historical Collection, University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
51
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
stated that the cleared fields on the map are now covered in deciduous trees; most of the
rest of the battlefield is in planted pines. The informants, who are local metal detector
hobbyists, have found artifacts consistent with heavy battle action in the area that would
be the second cleared field and the location on the modern USGS quad map is consistent
with the location on the Venable map.
The slough as drawn on the Venable map is no longer extant, nor is Old Cunningham
Road. Venable shows Cox Creek as a simple undulating channel. Today, the creek divides
into several interwoven channels that form a web across the north end of the battlefield.
Its present path does not allow the same access to the Saline River from the south as it
did in 1864. Today, access to the ferry site from the south is nearly impossible on foot,
though the ferry landing on the south side is visible from Jenkins’ Ferry State Park on the
north side of the Saline River. These minor differences, however, do not affect reading
the battlefield on the ground and from the USGS quad map.
KEY TERRAIN FEATURES
The key terrain features of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry are the Saline River bottom, Cox
Creek, the Saline River, a slough, and the ridgeline south of the Saline bottoms. There are
two possible choke points on the battlefield. The first is the area between Cox Creek and
the slough, the second is at the pontoon bridge on the Saline River (Figure 32).
Confederate Gen. Mosby Parsons described the battlefield: “To the front lay the valley
extending to the ferry, 2 miles distant. To the front of the Second Brigade, and about 100
yards distant, was a plowed field about a quarter of a mile square, which was flanked on
the south and east by heavy timber. Still farther to the front and about a quarter of a mile
was another field of about the same dimensions as the first, an intervening strip of woods
separating the two. This field, as the first, was bounded on the south and east all the way
to the river by heavy woods and wet marshes. The main road to the ferry ran along the
north side of the fields above described, and immediately to the north of and parallel
to the road ran a creek or bayou with deep, impassable banks, which were covered on
the north side with thick cane and underbrush. This creek emptied into the river at the
ferry.”3
The weather was a significant factor in the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. The rain exaggerated
every advantage created by the terrain and the water courses associated with the
battlefield. The rains of April 29-30, 1864, made road transportation difficult and the
standing water across the bottom made any and all movements challenging.
3 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 809.
52
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 32: Key Terrain Features - map based on Leola USGS quad map.
53
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The difficulty of moving Confederate artillery clearly demonstrates the role that the
weather and terrain played in the bottom on April 30, 1864: “A section of Lesueur’s
battery had been brought to support the infantry and placed, at the suggestion of General
Marmaduke, in the open field (Cooper’s) and near the edge of the creek. The boggy
ground was almost impassible, and it was with great effort that the guns were put in
position.”4
The dominant terrain feature is the Saline River bottom. The land falls from a high of
220’ above mean sea level on the ridge to a low of 190’ in the bottom. In the bottom is a
low area behind a slight rise that crosses the second cleared field. The Confederates refer
to this low area as the swale in their reports. This ground served as a defensive position
for the Confederates once they became engaged.
In 1864 the bottom was heavily wooded except for three cleared fields which were
planted by families living in or near the bottom. The fields were east of the military
road and between the ridge and the intersection of the military and Old Cunningham
roads. All of the cleared fields were west of present-day AR 46. Both armies crossed the
southernmost field. The Union army set up its defense line in the wooded area between
the second and third fields. The third field was used by the Federals as a staging area.
Other terrain features include the high ridge on the southern end of the battlefield that
served as the staging area for the Confederate army as it prepared to launch attacks into
the bottom, a slough in the bottom east of the central field, and Cox Creek and the Saline
River. The watercourses created and define the bottom and are key terrain features.
On April 29, 1864, Gen. Frederick Steele’s army arrived in the Saline River bottom. The
army had been in full retreat since leaving Camden on April 26, 1864. It rained on April
29 and continued to rain overnight and into the next day. Both the river and the creek
were high and there was standing water in the bottom. The passage of Steele’s two-milelong wagon and artillery train rutted the road and churned up the fields over which the
wheeled vehicles and infantry crossed.
Confederate Gen. Sterling Price commented upon the terrain of the Jenkins’ Ferry
battlefield: “The nature of the ground, swampy, with dense woods and undergrowth,
rendered the movements of the troops very difficult, and the falling rain increased the
4 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 782.
54
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
discomfort of men already nearly exhausted by long marches and loss of rest.”5
The Union army had been low on rations for the soldiers and forage for the horses and
mules since the expedition began. Now the commanders only wanted to cross the Saline
and return to Little Rock. Confederate Gen. Edmund Kirby Smith sought to catch and
destroy the army and retake Little Rock. The Confederates caught up with the Union
army April 29, 1864, and engaged the rearguard most of the afternoon and into the
evening. While Steele’s rear guard held off the Confederate vanguard, Union engineers
constructed an India-rubber pontoon bridge across the Saline.
Gen. Frederick Salomon, who was charged with the defense of the Union army, chose a
location approximately two miles north of the southern ridge to set his main defense line.
This allowed him to use the terrain in the bottom to his advantage. He was able to shorten
his front and use the natural features—Cox Creek and a slough—to his advantage: “.
. .Salomon formed his line of battle in a good position for defense, the right resting
perpendicularly on an impassable bayou, and the left, which was protected by a wooded
swamp. . .”6
OBSERVATION AND FIELD OF FIRE
The terrain features that define the battlefield also negated any good observation points.
From the high ridge on the south end of the battlefield officers could probably see to the
end of the first cleared field but it is very unlikely that they could have seen any further.
Between the first and second cleared fields was a belt of trees approximately one-half
mile wide (Figure 33).
From the high ridge to the Union pontoon bridge on the Saline River is approximately
four miles. In the early morning hours of April 30, 1864, Gen. Samuel Rice moved his
infantry out of range of the Confederate artillery on the ridge. Rice’s move negated any
advantage that the high ground might have held and forced the Confederates to come
into the bottom to fight the battle. Rice placed his infantry in the belt of trees north of
the second cleared field, between Cox Creek and the slough. This position created an
excellent field of fire because the Confederates had to cross an open field to assault the
position.
The terrain and the weather conditions limited both observation and field of fire, as
the smoke from the weapons sank in the bottom and the saturated ground made the
employment of artillery a risky proposition. Salomon changed his front to give him a
5 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 782.
6 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 669.
55
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 33: Observations and Fields of Fire - map based on Leola USGS quad map.
56
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
better defensive position: “I determined to withdraw nearer the river, where my lines
would be shorter and my flanks better protected.”7
Moving the Union line further into the bottom had the desired effect. The Confederates
were forced to cross open ground and could not bring their numbers to bear upon the
Union line. Union skirmishers met the attackers and then fell back to the main line,
creating a excellent field of fire for the Union infantry. Confederate Gen. James C. Tappan
observed his attack on the Union line: “The enemy’s skirmishers were posted on a line
about the center of the field, their line of battle being in the woods at the end of the same.
My command drove in their skirmishers and became heavily and hotly engaged with their
main line.”8
Observation in the bottom was limited to what soldiers and commanders could see from
their positions in the open fields or in the woods. Fields of fire were created by lines of
infantry firing en mass. The advantage that the Union army held in terms of a field of fire
was created by their constricted position.
COVER AND CONCEALMENT
The Union army created a crude breastwork out of trees and logs in the woods on the
north end of the second cleared field. The Confederates used the swale and slight rise
in the second cleared field as cover and concealment from the Union line in the woods
(Figure 34).
Gen. Thomas Waul described the Union breastworks: “After a brisk fire between my
skirmishers and the enemy’s they were driven back in upon their main line, which rapidly
fell back to cover in the timber behind logs, rails, and other temporary defenses.”9
In addition to the natural and man-made positions used by the armies, the atmospheric
conditions also served to conceal the two sides from one another. The damp air and the
thick smoke created a fog that covered the battlefield: “Owing to the dense fog and the
dense clouds of smoke which hung in the thick woods, many times, opposing lines could
only be discovered by the flash of muskets.”10
7 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 690.
8 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 802.
9 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 817.
10 Joseph Palmer Blessington, The Campaigns of Walker’s Texas Division, reprint edition, State House
Press, Austin, Texas, 1994, p. 250.
57
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 34: Cover and Concealment - map based on Leola USGS quad map.
58
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Both sides used the forest and any available natural terrain as cover. Except for the log
breastworks created by the Union soldiers, there were no prepared defensive positions
on the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield. This pitched battle was fought in the open and men
individually or in groups sought cover behind trees, slight rises and other features that
offered cover and concealment in the wooded bottom and cleared fields.
OBSTACLES
The Confederate soldiers faced numerous natural and man-made obstacles as they
marched into the Saline bottom to attack the Union army (Figure 35). The weather
compounded the obstacles. Two days of rain had saturated the ground leaving streams
swollen and standing water in the bottom. The military road that wound through the
bottom to the Saline River had been rutted by the passage of the Union army’s wagon
train, artillery and cavalry. The passage of the infantry across the clear fields caused that
ground to become boggy.
The time frame and the condition of the Union army precluded any prepared defenses in
the bottom prior to the Confederate attack. The Union army had been marching almost
nonstop from April 26 until the evening of April 29, 1864, when it arrived in the bottom.
The men’s ability to construct earthworks was limited by time, exhaustion and the lack
of rations needed to revive them. The only prepared defensive position was a makeshift
log and tree breastwork in the tree line north of the second clear field. This position
constituted the only man-made obstacle on the battlefield.
Cox Creek and the Saline River also were obstacles for soldiers in the battle and both
were critical to the outcome of the engagement. The rise of the river due to the spring
rains kept Gen. James F. Fagan from crossing the river and cutting off Steele’s army
as he was ordered. He wrote: “I continued for several days (Tuesday, Wednesday and
Thursday) attempting a crossing of the Saline, but without success.”11 Consequently,
Fagan was in Arkadelphia when the battle occurred.
Cox Creek was an obstacle that the Union army overcame. Confederate soldiers crossed
Cox Creek and attempted to flank the Union army but Gen. Samuel Rice ordered the
43rd Illinois across the creek, checking the Confederate maneuver. “The men, with some
hesitancy, plunged into the narrow but swollen stream, the water being 3 to 4 feet deep,
filling the cartridge boxes of many.”12
11 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 790.
12 O.R. Series I, Vol. XXXIV, Part I, p. 725.
59
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 35: Obstacles - map based on Leola USGS quad map.
60
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
AVENUES OF APPROACH AND RETREAT
Only two roads traversed the Saline bottom, the military road and Old Cunningham
Road. The Union army, which had been following the military road from Tulip, Arkansas,
followed it into the bottom and bridged the Saline River with an India-rubber pontoon
bridge (Figure 36).
The Confederates used both roads to some extent. They followed the military road to
the high ridge at the south end of the battlefield. From there, they deployed in the first
cleared field and then abandoned the road and went into the bottom in line of battle,
marching across the fields and through the woods. The last attack of the day they used
Old Cunningham Road to get a portion of Walker’s Texas Division into position to attack
the Union left.
In 1864, neither Cox Creek nor the Saline River was navigable. The historic map does not
show any alternate routes through the bottom. The roads and cleared field were the only
lines of approach or retreat on the battlefield. The Confederates went in and came out
using the same routes. The Union army did not contest their withdrawal. The Union army
followed the military road into the Saline bottom. Gen. Frederick Steele’s army crossed
the Saline on the pontoon bridge, which was then destroyed, and marched unmolested
from what is today Grant County back to Little Rock. The Confederate army had no way
to cross the swollen Saline River and could not pursue.
61
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 36: Avenues of Approach and Retreat - map based on Leola USGS quad map.
62
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY
63
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE JENKINS’ FERRY BATTLEFIELD TODAY
INTRODUCTION
The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield is located in Dallas and Grant counties, Arkansas. It extends
from about two miles southeast of Tulip in Dallas County to about the community of
Dogwood in Grant County. The battlefield occupies nearly 7,800 mostly forested acres
(Figure 37).
The main engagement area is located between the Saline River, Cox Creek, SR 46 and a
ridge just north of the city limits of Leola, Arkansas. Two other significant areas within
the battlefield have also been determined to be priorities for preservation. The first is the
site of the opening engagement on April 29, 1864, and is south of Leola in Dallas County
in Sections 2 and 3, Township 7 South, Range 15 West. Here, on the afternoon of April 29
an artillery duel began an engagement that ended that evening on the ridgeline north of
the Saline River bottom just beyond Grant County Road 6.
The second is the portion of the
battlefield known as the “burning
field.” Its exact location has yet to be
determined but it is generally located
within Sections 33 and 34 Township
5 South, Range 14 West on the Leola
quadrangle and Sections 27 and 28
in Township 5 South, Range 14 West
on the Prattsville quadrangle (Figure
38).
Figure 38: View of the Burning Field area.
STUDY AREA
The Study Area of the battlefield encompasses some 7,800 acres in Dallas and Grant
counties, Arkansas.1 It stretches from approximately two miles south of Tulip and north
along Dallas County Road 409 for six miles where it reaches the Grant County line and
the road becomes Grant County 1, which it follows into and through Leola. The route
of these two roads is the route of the historic military road that Gen. Frederick Steele
followed north to Little Rock. From its southern boundary through Leola, the Study Area
is approximately one-half mile wide, approximately one-quarter mile on each side of
the road. At the main engagement site, approximately one-half mile north of the main
town grid of Leola, the Study Area expands reaching a maximum width of about two
1 American Battlefield Protection Program, Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on
the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields: State of Arkansas, National Park Service, 2010, p. 11
64
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 37: The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield Study and Core Area as defined by the 2009
American Battlefield Protection Program survey.
65
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
and one-quarter miles. The Study
Area continues from the main
engagement area four miles north
to the site where the Union army
burned its wagons (Figure 39).
With the exception of the cities of
Leola and Tulip the battlefield is
sparsely populated. Much of the
land is in timber, for the most part
planted pine. Until 15 to 20 years
ago most of the land was owned by
timber or paper companies. They
have since divested themselves of
the land and it is now in the hands
of individuals. When the battlefield
was examined for this planning
study in the spring and summer
of 2013, active tree harvesting
operations were underway. Large
portions of the timber lands are
leased by hunting clubs.
The Study Area represents the historic extent
of the battle as it unfolded across the landscape.
It encompasses resources known to relate to
or contribute to the battle event: where troops
maneuvered and deployed immediately before,
during, and after combat and where they fought
during combat. Historic accounts, terrain analysis,
and feature identification inform the delineation of
the Study Area boundary. The Study Area indicates
the extent to which historic and archeological
resources associated with the battle (areas of
combat, command, communications, logistics,
medical services, etc.) may be found 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 encompasses the areas of fighting on
the battlefield. Positions that delivered or received
fire fall within the Core Area. Frequently described
as “hallowed ground,” land within the Core Area is
often the first to be targeted for protection.
The Core Area lies within the Study Area.
Figure 39: Military road (Dallas County 409) in
the southern portion of the battlefield.
66
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
CORE AREA
The Core Area of the battlefield is bisected by SR 46. It begins in the south about onehalf mile east of AR 229A and extends one-quarter mile north of the Saline River. The
Core Area was defined by the 2009 resurvey of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield as 3,078
acres of which 1,900 acres were listed in the 1994 Camden Expedition National Historic
Landmark boundary. This is the area where the significant combat occurred. According to
local metal detector hobbyists, all of the battle-related artifacts were found west of SR 46
(Figure 40).
Figure 40: General area of the Union line in Saline River bottom.
67
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURES
68
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Cultural and natural resources are the significant extant historic and archaeological
resources and natural features that help define the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield landscape.
There are six cultural and four natural features in the Study Area (Figures 52-54).
Tulip Methodist Cemetery – This cemetery
in the small town of Tulip is associated with Tulip
Methodist Church. The Confederate army withdrew to
Tulip following the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. Surgeons
treated the wounded at several locations in the small
town, including the Methodist church. The bodies of
Confederate generals Horace Randal and William Scurry,
who died of wounds received during the battle, were
transported to Tulip with the wounded and buried in the
cemetery. Their remains have since been moved to Texas.
None of the buildings in Tulip used as hospitals survive
(Figure 41).
Guesses Creek – This creek runs northwesterly
and roughly parallels the ridgeline that the military road
followed from Dallas into Grant County. It was in Dallas
County on the ridges bordering Guesses Creek that the
April 29, 1864, engagement began. The creek flows into
Cox Creek about one and one-quarter miles southwest of
the Core Area of the battlefield (Figure 42).
Site of the Cannonball House – This house sat
on a knoll on the east side of the floodplain of Guesses
Creek and immediately east of the military road (Dallas
County 409). Union artillery unlimbered near the house
and fired on the Confederates deployed on a ridge west
of Guesses Creek. The house, which stood until 1967, is
also said to have been used as a Confederate hospital. A
cannon motif worked into a decorative metal gate marks
the site (Figure 43).1
1 Elwin L. Goolsby, “The Lost Houses of Jenkins Ferry,” Grassroots: Journal of the Grant County
Museum, August, 1999, p. 2.
69
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Site of the Giles house – This house site is located on the west side of the
military road (Dallas County 409) approximately one-quarter mile north of the
Cannonball House. It is thought that the Union army deployed a second skirmish line
near this house, allowing the artillery near the Cannonball House to disengage. The house
stood until the late1990s (Figures 44-45).
Left: Giles house ca. 1985.
Right: a log outbuilding at
the Giles house site.
Military Road – Most of the fighting associated with
the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry took place along or near the
route of the military road, which Maj. Gen. Frederick
Steele’s army followed from Tulip to and across the
Saline River. Dallas County Road 409 and Grant County
Road 1 follow the route of the historic road, remnants of
which are still extant in the main engagement site (Figure
46).
John Rufus Taylor house – This small house is
the only extant antebellum structure on the Jenkins’ Ferry
battlefield. It is a one-story, end-gable frame structure
built on piers. The house has a metal roof and is sided
with horizontal planks and rolled asphalt siding. Built by
Taylor sometime before the Civil War, the house faces
the old military road between Leola and the Saline River.
Both armies would have marched past the house on the
way to the Saline River bottom (Figure 47).2
2 Goolsby, “The Lost Houses of Jenkins Ferry,” p. 3.
70
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Cox Creek – This creek helps define the main
engagement site of the April 30, 1864, Battle of Jenkins’
Ferry. The creek flows into the Saline River just north
of the ferry crossing and site of the Union pontoon
bridge. Most of the fighting took place on the south side
of the creek but both sides sent troops across the creek.
Some Union infantry remained on the north side of Cox
Creek during the battle, allowing them to enfilade the
Confederate line (Figure 48).
Saline River bottom – Most of the Core Area is
in the Saline River bottom, the most dominant natural
feature of the battlefield. From the ridgeline in the
southern end of the battlefield the land falls 30 feet as
it descends into the bottom. Today, planted pine and
hardwoods cover the area, which is crossed by Cox
Creek and other unnamed seasonal drainages. The
cleared agricultural fields that played a significant role in
the battle were located in the bottom near the road to the
ferry (Figure 49).
Saline River – The river was the main obstacle
between the Union army and fresh supplies in Little
Rock. There was no bridge. A small ferry operation on
the military road was the only crossing in the area. Local
tradition holds that Jane Jenkins, who operated the ferry,
sank the ferry boat so that the Union army could not use
it. Maj. Gen. Frederick Steele’s engineers bridged the
Saline River on the afternoon of April 29, 1864, using
inflatable India-rubber pontoons topped by wooden
planks. By mid-morning the next day all of the Union
army except the infantry had crossed the river on the
pontoon bridge (Figure 50).3
3 Personal communication Thomas Green, March 13, 2013.
71
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Jenkins’ Ferry – In 1864, this ferry on the Saline
River was operated by Jane Jenkins, who continued to
operate the rope-boat-system ferry until 1895. The ferry
was probably in operation until 1928 when the first
highway bridge was constructed. The old ferry road is
still visible in Jenkins’ Ferry State Park and on the far
side of the river from the park (Figure 51).4
4 “Jane McWhorter Jenkins, Pioneer, Ran Ferry Alone for 30 Years,” The Malvern Daily Record, February
5, 1963.
72
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 52: Cultural and Natural Resources map 1 of 3. Based on Leola USGS Quad map.
73
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 53: Cultural and Natural Resources map 2 of 3. Based on Leola USGS Quad map.
74
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 54: Cultural and Natural Resources map 3 of 3. Based on Leola USGS Quad map.
75
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
PREVIOUS PRESERVATION ACTIVITIES
76
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
PREVIOUS PRESERVATION ACTIVITIES
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry began on the afternoon of April 29, 1864, when the vanguard
of the Confederate army under the command of Gen. Sterling Price caught up with
the rearguard of Gen. Frederick Steele’s Union army just outside of Leola (then Sandy
Springs) in Dallas County, Arkansas. An artillery duel and running engagement ensued
that ended on the ridgeline above the Jenkins/Carver field north of Leola. The main battle
was fought the next day in the Saline River bottom. Union infantry held off numerous
assaults by Confederate infantry and cavalry, allowing Steele’s army to cross the Saline
River, destroy their pontoon bridge behind them, and continue their march toward Little
Rock. On May 1, 1864, approximately two miles north of the ferry/pontoon bridge
site, the Union army burned 200 to 250 wagons and abandoned many exhausted mules
and horses in an area that has locally come to be known as the “burning field.” For the
purposes of this preservation plan, this action ended the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry.
For 64 years after the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, little in
the way of preservation activities occurred. The, in 1928,
the Masonic Lodges of Leola and Sheridan purchased
3.65 acres of land on the north side of the Saline
River in the SW corner in the NW quarter of Section 8
Township 6 Range 14. The parcel encompassed the site
of Jenkins’ Ferry in what later became the Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park. That same year, on September 28, 1928, the
James F. Fagan and the Jenkins’ Ferry Chapters of the
United Daughters of the Confederacy erected a granite
monument approximately five feet tall and three feet wide
to commemorate the Confederate soldiers’ participation
in the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry (Figure 55). The monument
reads:
Erected in the memory of the soldiers of
the Confederacy, who gave their lives
for the cause at the Battle of Jenkins’
Ferry, April 30, 1864, dedicated September
19, 1928 by the James F. Fagan and
Jenkins Ferry Chapters of the United
Daughters of the Confederacy.
We honor their valor and sacrifice.
Figure 55: The UDC monument at
Jenkins’ Ferry State Park.
With the installation of the monument the area became a quasi-public park. It is not
known if the UDC continued to hold annual ceremonies at the monument, though it
seems likely. The marker was installed the same year that the first bridge was constructed
across the Saline River. The bridge, located immediately east of the parcel owned by the
77
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Masonic Lodge, provided easy access to the site.1
Another 33 years would pass before any other preservation activities would be initiated.
In 1961, which marked the beginning of the Civil War Centennial, local historians and
concerned citizens worked with their state representative to have a state park created.
That year, Act 10 of the Arkansas General Assembly created Jenkins’ Ferry Battleground
State Park. The state purchased 36.35 acres of land adjacent to and on the opposite side of
the river from the parcel owned by the Masonic Lodges of Leola and Sheridan and signed
a 100 year lease with the Masons for use of their property.2
That same year, the Grant County Chamber of Commerce hired Edwin C. Bearss to
write a book on the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. Bearss, at the time a research historian for
the National Park Service working out of Vicksburg National Military Park, completed
the first scholarly study of the battle and the Camden Campaign. The book, published in
1966, brought national recognition to the battlefield.3
In 1969, the Arkansas State Historic
Preservation Office nominated the
Jenkins’ Ferry Battleground to the
National Register of Historic Places.
Four years after the publication of
Bearss’ book, in early 1970, 26.35 acres
in Jenkins’ Ferry State Park were listed
in the National Register of Historic
Places (Figure 56). This designation,
while only listing a fraction of the
battlefield, recognized its historic
significance.4
Figure 56: Jenkins’ Ferry State Park
In 1993, the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry was recognized by the landmark Civil War Sites
Advisory Commission (CWSAC) as one of the nation’s most significant and endangered
Civil War battlefields. The Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, established by the
U.S. Congress on November 28, 1990, “. . . was asked to identify the nation’s historically
significant Civil War sites; determine their relative importance; determine their
condition; assess threats to their integrity; and recommend alternatives for preserving and
1 Joe Walker, Harvest of Death: The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, Arkansas, N.P. 2011, p. 138.
2 Jenkins’ Ferry State Park, Arkansas Encyclopedia, http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/ encyclopedia/
entry-detail.aspx?entryID=1227.
3 Edwin C. Bearss, Steele’s Retreat From Camden & The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, reprint edition, Civil War
Roundtable Associates, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1990, p. xiii.
4 Jack E. Porter, “Jenkins’ Ferry Battleground,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination
Form, October 27, 1969, on file at the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Little Rock, Arkansas.
78
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
interpreting them.”5
Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield was ranked as a Priority III.3 (Class C) battlefield. The priority
III ranking indicated that the battlefield was in need of additional protection. The III.3
Class C ranking indicated that it had good or fair integrity and low threats. In 1993 it was
determined that this battlefield was relatively safe from development but that additional
land could and should be preserved.6
Recognition by the CWSAC means that the battlefield is eligible for planning funding
from the American Battlefield Protection Program. It also means that the battlefield is
eligible for up to 50% of the appraised value for land purchase through the Land and
Water Conservation Fund administered by the American Battlefield Protection Program
(ABPP).
A year after the CWSAC survey the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program nominated
the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry for listing as a National Historic Landmark. The nomination
was undertaken as part of the Camden Expedition National Historic Landmark Study.
In 1994, 1,900 acres of battlefield were listed as a National Historic Landmark (Figure
57).7 This is the highest designation
a historic site can receive: “NHL
designation is an official recognition by
the federal government of the national
significance of historic properties.”8
The only interpretation on the
battlefield is at Jenkins’ Ferry State
Park. Sometime in the 1990s Arkansas
State Parks installed three all-weather
metal interpretive panels. One panel
interprets the April 30, 1864 battle; the
others interpret the Saline River and
Figure 58: Interpretation at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park.
the park (Figure 58). Visitors may access
5 Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, Civil War Sites Advisory Commission: Report on the Nation’s
Civil War Battlefields, Technical Vol. II: Battlefield Summaries, Civil War Sites Advisory Commission,
Washington, DC, 1993, p. 6 and Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, Civil War Sites Advisory
Commission: Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, Civil War Sites Advisory Commission,
Washington, DC, 1993, inside cover.
6 Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, Civil War Sites Advisory Commission: Report on the Nation’s
Civil War Battlefields, p. 51.
7 Don Baker and Edwin C. Bearss, “Camden Expedition Sites,” National Historic Landmark Nomination,
November 29, 1993, form on file at Arkansas Historic Preservation Program
8 National Park Service National Register Bulletin: How to Prepare National Historic Landmark
Nominations, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1999, p.
9.
79
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 57: The red line is the Core Area boundary and the shaded triangle is the National Historic
Landmark boundary. Map based on Leola USGS Quad. North is to the top, scale is 1:24,000
80
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
an audio presentation on the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry via their mobile phone. The program
was developed by the Arkansas Department of Heritage and Civil War Sesquicentennial
Commission; a sign installed in 2011 tells visitors how to access the program.
After the passage of the Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 (Public Law 107359, 111 Stat. 3016), Congress directed the American Battlefield Protection Program to
review the status of the 383 battlefields identified in 1993 by the Civil War Sites Advisory
Commission. The law directed the ABPP to collect data on the following for the period
between 1993 and the update:
1) Preservation activities carried out at the 383 battlefields identified by the CWSAC
2) Changes in the condition of the battlefields
3) Any other relevant developments relating to the battlefields 9
In the draft Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s
Civil War Battlefields the ABPP increased the size of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield and
upgraded its priority level to a Priority II Class C (+) ranking. These changes were based
on perceived changes in threats to the battlefield, its NHL status, and the opportunity for
preservation.10
In 2010 The Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield was organized and in 2011 obtained
501(c)(3) status. The organization’s mission is: “to protect, preserve and promote the
historical significance of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield through funding and development
of educational programs and community outreach efforts, including: tours, re-enactments,
research, publications, lectures, workshops and preservation of battlefield property.”11
The creation of a not-for-profit organization allows the citizen-based organization to raise
money and begin the process of preserving the battlefield. The FOJFB has been working
with numerous partners in Grant County and in Arkansas. This project, which was funded
by grant received from the American Battlefield Protection Program demonstrates that
the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield has begun to move forward with battlefield
preservation efforts.
9 American Battlefield Protection Program, Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on
the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields: State of Arkansas, National Park Service, Washington, DC, 2010, p. 3.
10 American Battlefield Protection Program, Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report
on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields Draft v. 8 for Peer Review, National Park Service, Washington, DC,
2013, p. 52.
11 Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield website, www.jenkinsferry.com.
81
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE PLANNING PROCESS
82
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE PLANNING PROCESS
The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield is historically part of the spring 1864 Camden Campaign.
It is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and is also a National Historic
Landmark as part of the Camden Expedition NHL. The battlefield retains excellent
integrity.
The Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield received a grant from the American
Battlefield Protection Program to prepare a battlefield preservation plan in 2012.
In March 2013, the Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield retained Mudpuppy &
Waterdog, Inc., a public history consulting firm based in Versailles, Kentucky, to prepare
the plan.
Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc. developed this community consensus-based plan using
methodology endorsed by the American Battlefield Protection Program that has evolved
over the past two decades. This methodology has become the standard for battlefield
preservation.
Over the course of this project Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc. visited Grant County and the
battlefield in March, April, May and July, 2013. Each trip except the last included tours
or inspections of the battlefield, meetings with stakeholders and elected officials, and
ongoing meetings with officers and board members of the Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry
Battlefield.
MARCH 2013
During the first project site visit the week
of March 4, 2013, Joseph Brent and Maria
Brent of Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc. met
with the officers and board members of
the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield
and toured the battlefield. Hays Swayze,
a member of the Friends of Jenkins’
Ferry Battlefield and a metal detector
hobbyist, led the first day-long tour, a
driving/walking tour of the battlefield.
Figure 59: L-R Alberta Harper, Maria Brent and
Jerrell Harper, Alberta Harper and Randy
Jerrell Harper in the Saline River bottom.
Yarberry, who are also members of the
Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield and metal detector hobbyists, led the second daylong tour. In this case, the group used all-terrain vehicles to access the battlefield. This
tour covered much of the same ground as the first except that the group was able to get
to areas of the battlefield that were inaccessible the first day due to wet/rugged terrain
(Figure 59).
83
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Seeing the terrain where the battle was fought fleshed out the accounts in the primary
and secondary sources examined prior to the field visits. The Saline bottom, which is a
defining feature of the battlefield and where most of the combat occurred, is located in
the Core Area. The field visits were extremely helpful in understanding the terrain and the
guides’ knowledge of the battlefield provided a very clear picture of the location of battle
lines and significant features.
The tours covered the entire battlefield, extending into Dallas County where the battle
began on April 29, 1864. The old road system and other cultural and natural resources
were photographed and their locations mapped. The final tour ended at what is locally
known as the “burning field.” This area north of the bottom was the site of the last action
of the Union army on May 1, 1864—burning the wagons and sending the wounded and
Contraband to Pine Bluff—before retreating to Little Rock.
Before and after the tours Joseph Brent and Maria Brent met with members of the Friends
of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield. The goals of the project were discussed and meetings
with elected officials scheduled. Board member Roy Wilson gave a slide presentation
of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, which is a talk that he gives to school groups, visitors,
service clubs and other interested people.
While in Sheridan, Arkansas, Joseph Brent and Maria Brent, and Richard Jenkins and
Brenda Stuckey, chair and treasurer/secretary of the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield,
respectively, met with Grant County Judge/Executive Kemp Nall and Joe Wise, Mayor
of Sheridan. Both were very supportive of the project. The group also met with Becky
Nichols, Executive Director, Grant County Chamber of Commerce. The meeting with
Ms. Nichols and subsequent meetings at the Grant County
Museum helped the authors better understand how the
community viewed the battlefield and its importance and
provided the opportunity to talk about the ways in which
a preserved battlefield can contribute to the quality of life
and economic well being of the Grant County area.
APRIL 2013
Joseph Brent and Maria Brent made a second visit to
Grant County the week of April 15, 2013. Activities
included a follow-up trip to the battlefield to examine
the ground of the opening engagement of April 29, 1864,
and a revisit of the area near the ferry crossing. This field
trip confirmed the location of the artillery duel of April
29, 1864, and located the foundation of the Giles house,
which was on the military road and a likely area for troop
deployment (Figure 60).
Figure 60: L-R Hayes Swayze,
Tommy Green, Brenda Stuckey,
Maria Brent and Richard Jenkins
tour the battlefield.
84
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Maria Brent conducted land research at the Grant County Assessor’s Office, locating
parcel numbers for parcels in priority areas: the Core Area, engagement of April 29, and
the burning field. Working with the clerks in the assessor’s office, the property valuation
record cards were printed out. They were later entered into a Microsoft Excel spread
sheet. This process was repeated for parcels in Dallas County.
On April 17, Joseph Brent, Maria Brent, Richard Jenkins and Brenda Stuckey met
with Arkansas State Parks personnel—Randy Roberson, Manager of Planning and
Development; Jeff King, Chief Park Planner; Shayla Albey, Park Planner/Historic
Preservation Specialist; and Mitchell Johnson, Real Estate Officer—and Mark Christ,
Community Outreach Director, Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, at Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park to discuss the project. Both state parks and the historic preservation program
are stakeholders in the project. The Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP)
conducted the 2009 resurvey of the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission battlefields in
Arkansas and prepared the National Register and NHL nominations for the site. Arkansas
State Parks owns just over 36 acres of the battlefield, the only land that has been
preserved, and has expressed interest in improving and enlarging Jenkins’ Ferry State
Park.
The meeting introduced the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield to representatives of two
state agencies that will be instrumental in helping them achieve their goals of preserving
and interpreting the battlefield. It demonstrated to FOJFB that the state has an interest in
the battlefield and provided contacts for the relatively new group that will prove useful in
the future.
Arkansas State Parks provided a document developed by Jay S. Miller, former Chief of
Interpretation for Arkansas State Parks, outlining a master plan for the Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park. The plan called for the purchase of additional land and developing more
interpretation. The proposed land purchase was based on the 1993 Civil War Sites
Advisory Commission map. An interpretive trail outlined in the plan would take visitors
from the ridges at the south end of the main engagement area through the location of the
cleared agricultural fields to the Saline River. The master plan was never fully developed
but the concepts outlined deserve further consideration.
As a part of the project, a presentation was made to the Sheridan Rotary Club at the
request of Grant County Judge/Executive Kemp Nall. Joseph Brent used Power Point
to present the history of the battle and to outline the purpose of the project and its goals.
Some 50 Rotarians and guests attended and the local press covered the meeting.
FIRST COMMUNITY MEETING
The first community meeting was held April 16, 2013, at the Sheridan Community
Center. The meeting was advertised through a front page article in the Sheridan Headlight
85
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
on April 10, 2013, and the Friends of Jenkins’s Ferry Battlefield website. About 30
people attended the meeting. PowerPoint was used to present a brief history of the battle;
introduce the attendees to the American Battlefield Protection Program, who funded the
project; to discuss what a preservation plan is, and what it would and would not do; and
to briefly outline the benefits of Civil War sites preservation (Figure 61).
Figure 61: Attendees of the first community
meeting at the Sheridan Community Center.
After the presentation the attendees were asked four questions to gage their understanding
of the preservation process and to guide the planning process.
1. What are the benefits of preserving the battlefield?
The first question was designed to get the group to think in terms of preservation and
economic development. The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield is a new organization
and its previous activities have been focused on research, interpretation and events.
The responses to the question demonstrated that those attending understood the historic
significance of the battlefield, the benefits of preservation and the battlefield’s potential
as an economic development engine for Grant County and demonstrated enthusiasm for
undertaking the battlefield’s preservation.
 Preserving the battlefield preserves history
 A preserved battlefield can generate revenue for city and county governments
 You preserve a significant battlefield, one worthy of preservation
 You give all of the people who saw the film Lincoln a chance to visit the
battlefield the Lincoln character mentions in the opening scene
 Preserving the battlefield creates a resource for education
 Preserving the battlefield will allow people to know its size, terrain and
significance
 A preserved battlefield will be a source of pride for the community and tells
visitors that residents care enough about their history to preserve it
86
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
 The preservation effort could unify the communities in the county
 A preserved battlefield will make history real for young people and could spark a
life-long interest in history
 A preserved battlefield will be a great resource for visitors and will generate
tourism
2. What challenges will the preservation effort face?
The idea of undertaking a project as large as preserving thousands of acres of land is
daunting. The greatest concern was where funding for the effort could be secured. Other
answers focused on Jenkins’ Ferry State Park as a partner and the issues with interpreting
a larger park. Some answers demonstrated a misunderstanding of the preservation
process. As with most groups, their focus tended to be interpretation rather than
preservation.
The response regarding limited access reflects the fact that much of the land is privately
owned and leased to hunting clubs. Deer season generally runs from September until
February and it would be unsafe to have visitors on or near much of the battlefield during
that period.
 Access to the land is limited
 Lack of funding
 Lack of funding in the long term – for staffing, upkeep and maintenance
 Problems in interpreting the battlefield caused by seasonal flooding
 The dangers posed by hunters
3. How can those challenges be overcome?
Attendees were asked how the challenges identified in the previous question might
be overcome. While some of the responses were humorous, others demonstrated an
understanding of the kind of effort that will be needed to move the preservation project
forward.
They acknowledged the need to grow the not-for-profit organization membership base
and to develop partnerships in the community and with state legislators. The answers
demonstrate that those attending understand that one organization alone can not preserve
the battlefield, but that they must reach out to the community and beyond for support
 Pray a lot
 Outlaw guns
87
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
 Community involvement — raise support for the preservation effort by
demonstrating its benefits to the community
 Get the support of local governments and citizens by expanding the membership
base of the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield throughout the county and beyond
 Garner the support of state legislators
4. What partners will be essential in the preservation effort?
Partnerships are essential to any preservation effort. The attendees were asked to name
groups and individuals that might become partners in the preservation of the Jenkins’
Ferry Battlefield.
The answers reflect an understanding of the need for broad-based partnerships. The list
includes individuals, organizations and businesses, state and federal agencies and national
organizations.
 The community
 State senators and congressmen
 The American Battlefield Protection Program
 Arkansas Historic Preservation Program
 Will Stephens family (local philanthropists; the family funded the community
center where this meeting took place)
 Local schools
 Grant County Museum
 Arkansas State Parks
 Local businesses
 Descendents of the families here in the 1860s
 Descendents of Union soldiers who fought in the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry
 The Civil War Trust
 Wal-Mart, through their community grant program
MAY 2013
A third site visit was made toward the end of May. This follow-up visit included trips to
the battlefield, rechecking house sites, and the military road and its association with the
ridge in the southern end of the Core Area. Hayes Swayze and Thomas Green served as
guides, the tour also visited extant remains of the historic road bed within the battlefield
and a house site (Figure 62).
88
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figure 62: A portion of the military road in
Dallas County.
In addition the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry
Battlefield historian Roy Wilson led a 3.5mile tour across the battlefield beginning at
the ridge in the south and exiting just south of
the Saline River. Mr. Wilson has been leading
tours across the battlefield for a number
of years and the onsite tour helped tie the
information he provided in his earlier slide
presentation to the ground in the Saline River
bottom (Figure 63).
Discussions with Grant County Judge/
Executive Kemp Nall confirmed that Grant
County does not have planning and zoning and
the county has no comprehensive plan. The
City of Sheridan does have zoning, but none of
the battlefield is in or near the city limits. The
lack of land use planning is not uncommon in
the rural south. Outside of larger urban centers,
Figure 63: Water in the Saline River bottom in
or counties that include those centers, in the
southern tier of the U.S. there is very little land- June 2013.
use planning.
JULY 31, 2013
Copies of the draft were sent to the American Battlefield Protection Program, Arkansas
Historic Preservation Program and Arkansas State Parks for review.
AUGUST 2013
Joseph Brent and Maria Brent traveled to Sheridan the week of August 5 and presented
the draft Preservation Plan for the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield at the second community
meeting, which was held August 6, 2013 at the Sheridan Department of Parks and
Recreation Community Center. Joseph Brent facilitated the meeting, which was attended
by XX individuals. Attendees received a handout outlining the major points of the plan,
which were explained in a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation was followed by
a question and answer period. Joseph Brent told those present that copies of the plan
would be available at the Grant County Museum and Grant County Public Library for a
minimum of 45 days if they wished to review and comment on the plan. Copies of the
draft plan were also delivered to the Friends of Jenkins Ferry Battlefield on August 6.
Comments from the public agencies, the Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield and the
public were incorporated into the final document.
89
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
PRESERVING THE BATTLEFIELD
90
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
PRESERVING THE JENKINS’ FERRY BATTLEFIELD
The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield is an important part of the history of our nation, the state
of Arkansas and Grant County. It has existed along the ridges and in the bottomland for
nearly 150 years. Local historians, metal detector hobbyists and Civil War enthusiasts
know of this battlefield, but there is only one sign at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park to alert the
would-be visitor to the existence of this significant Civil War site.
In 1864, a traveler in Leola, then Shady Spring,
could follow the military road to Little Rock.
On the way, the road traversed the Saline River
bottom to Jenkins’ Ferry. Traces of that road
still exist in the bottom. The agricultural fields
are gone, grown up in hardwoods. The virgin
forest from which those fields were carved has
been replaced by planted pine. These changes
are minor in the larger scheme of things. The
battlefield remains and can be read by those
Figure 64: The military road in Dallas County.
who take the time to examine the landscape
and subtle variations in topography and
understand what they meant to the soldiers
fighting in the muddy fields on April 30, 1864 (Figure 64).
The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield merits preservation, and not only because events in the
Trans-Mississippi Theater of the Civil War are underrepresented. The Battle of Jenkins’
Ferry was the last battle of the nationally significant Camden Expedition. It is not a story
for the faint of heart; it was an ugly, brutal battle. All battles are, but this one featured
atrocities on both sides, the horror of Civil War was played out on a personal level
between men and the races. The recent movie Lincoln included a scene featuring the
Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry which retold what the violence was about. In the words of our
16th president “It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.” As we near
the 150th anniversary of the battle it is inspiring that an organized effort to preserve this
battlefield has begun.
Exactly 40 acres of this 7,800-acre battlefield are protected—36.65 acres belong to
Jenkins’ Ferry State Park; 3.35 acres are leased by Arkansas State Parks from the
Sheridan Masonic Lodge. The park preserves the site of Jenkins’ Ferry; however, none of
the fighting occurred within the park boundaries (Figure 65).
91
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Why preserve a Civil War battlefield?
Preserving a Civil War battlefield is not just
the right thing to do, it makes solid economic
sense.
Figure 65: The Jenkins’ Ferry State Park
preserves 40 acres of the battlefield.
A Civil War battlefield – whether protected
and open to visitors or preserved by a
private owner as open space – can be a
significant component of a community’s
economy, yielding economic, cultural and
environmental benefits.1
According to the Civil War Trust publication Blue, Gray and Green: Why Saving Civil
War Battlefields Makes Economic Sense, a preserved Civil War battlefield is an asset to
the surrounding area. The battlefield, once preserved and interpreted, can also be an asset
to the business community. Tourists who visit pay for services locally. Those purchases
translate into jobs and higher incomes for residents, and more tax revenue for state and
local governments.
The driving force behind the economic engine is Civil War travelers, who tend to be
middle-aged, affluent and better educated. These visitors have more leisure time and
more disposable income than other vacationers. They spend more money and stay longer
than the average leisure traveler. They are very discriminating, often coming to an area
specifically to visit a Civil War battlefield and they often visit a place just for its history.
The Civil War Trust study demonstrated that over half of the travelers visited a place
because there was a battlefield. On the same visit they often visited nearby Civil War and
historic sites and tended to recommend sites to their friends. Being part of a regional,
statewide or national Civil War trail will improve the prospect for visitation. The Civil
War traveler often visits multiple sites on any given trip.
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry was historically part of the March-May, 1864, Camden
Expedition and has been listed as part of the Camden Expedition National Historic
Landmark. All of the battlefields and some of the earthworks in Camden associated with
this campaign are extant. Working with other sites to create a Camden Expedition Trail
would be an excellent catalyst for bringing Civil War visitors into the area.
1 Frances H. Kennedy and Douglas R. Porter, Dollar$ and Sense of Battlefield Preservation: The
Economic Benefits of Protecting Civil War Battlefields, The Preservation Press, National Trust for Historic
Preservation, Washington, DC, 1992, p. 1.
92
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
How does this translate into dollars and cents?
According to the National Trust for Historic
Preservation, the average heritage tourist
spends $50 per person per day and stays an
average of two days. If 20,000 people visit the
battlefields over the course of a year it would
generate $2 million for the local economy
(Figure 66).
Figure 66: Civil War tourists can visit the Grant
County Museum, but unfortunately there is little
access to the battlefield.
In order to have a Civil War battlefield that
will draw visitors to the area the land, at
least some of it, has to be preserved. For
a site to draw people and keep them in the area for any length of time a portion of the
battlefield must have public access. That is, there must be someplace where people
can experience the battlefield—walk the fields and see the area as the soldiers saw it.
This is the experience that will bring heritage tourists. In order to create this experience
landownership is required.
CULTIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
Banding together with like-minded individuals and groups locally, across the state,
region and nation is the key to a successful preservation effort. Forget about county lines
(Grant County did not even exist at the time of the Civil War). Often there is competition
between adjoining counties and between the county seat and other towns in the county.
Keep in mind that visitors don’t pay attention to city and county boundaries. If they come
to see the battlefield they want to see it all.
Reach out to local government officials. Make sure all of the appropriate officials are
aware of this plan. Local officials in Grant County, Sheridan and Leola are supportive
of the project. Keep them informed. Reach out to state representatives and state
senators. Jenkins’ Ferry State Park receives funding from the state; the general assembly
determines who gets those funds and how much and how they will be used. If local
members of the legislature want to see Jenkins’ Ferry State Park expanded it can happen.
Grant County is currently in the Southeast Arkansas Civil War Heritage Trail
(SEACWHT) yet all but one of the remainder of the Camden Expedition sites are in the
Southwest Arkansas Civil War Heritage Trail (SWACWHT). Working with SWACWHT
is another partnership opportunity. This eighteen-county region encompasses Prairie
D’Ane, Elkins’ Ferry, Moscow Church, Poison Spring, Camden, and the site of the April
93
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
29, 1864 engagement that opened the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. The rest of the Jenkins’
Ferry battlefield and the Battle of Marks’ Mill are part of the SEACWHT.
In the 1990s Jay Miller, the former Director of Interpretation for Arkansas State Parks,
wrote a brochure called The Red River Campaign in Arkansas. This simple brochure
was designed to get Civil War travelers to Poison Spring, Marks’ Mill and Jenkins’
Ferry state parks. Now is the time to reach out to organizations working to preserve
and interpret these sites and others associated with the Camden Expedition. A new
umbrella organization might be organized that could seek funds for land preservation and
interpretation.
The Arkansas Civil War Sesquicentennial
Commission is another excellent partnership
opportunity. Next year is the sesquicentennial
of the Camden Campaign. The Friends of
the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield are already
working toward getting a historical marker
and hosting a reenactment. Imagine the impact
the sesquicentennial could have on the region
and the state if all of the Camden Campaign
Figure 67: Fort Diamond in Camden, Arkansas, sites coordinated their activities and worked
is a city park and open to the public.
together to make these events as good as
they could be. Coordinate your efforts with the Arkansas Civil War Sesquicentennial
Commission and other efforts to promote Camden, and the battles of Poison Spring,
Marks’ Mill, Prairie D’Ane, Elkins’ Ferry and Moscow Church (Figure 67).
Preserving the first new battlefield land in over 50 years would be the perfect way to
commemorate the Civil War sesquicentennial. The partnership the Friends of Jenkins’
Ferry Battlefield has established with the American Battlefield Protection Program
should be expanded. There are many projects that the ABPP will fund—additional
research, interpretive planning and archaeology all fall under categories funded through
the battlefield grant program. Perhaps most importantly, the ABPP funds land purchase,
granting 50% of the appraised market value of land in the battlefield Core or Study areas.
The Civil War Trust is a national not-for-profit that has more experience preserving
battlefield land than any other organization in the country. The CWT can help with land
protection and have staff that specializes in land purchase and financing. Establishing a
relationship with the Civil War Trust will, literally, pay benefits for years to come.
94
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The Central Arkansas Land Trust is another potential partner. Its mission is to “. . .
preserve, study, and manage these properties in order to enhance their conservation,
and to ensure their environmental, scientific, educational, and recreational features in
perpetuity.” This organization, headquartered in Hot Springs, is affiliated with the Land
Trust Alliance. The CALT also holds easements.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service has information on programs that preserve
agricultural land. One, the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program, may be an option
for properties slated for easement protection. There is federal funding attached to this
program.
The Forest Legacy Program, a national program, might be used to help secure battlefield
land. The program “. . . purchases land and establishes conservation easements to protect
environmentally important forests.” Contact the local forestry professional to see if this
program would work or could be tailored to work as a part of the preservation package
for the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
Explore the possibility of creating a Camden Expedition National Heritage Area. National
Heritage Areas are a “grassroots, community-driven approach to heritage conservation
and economic development. Through public-private partnerships NHA supports historic
preservation, natural resource conservation, recreation, heritage tourism, and educational
projects.”2
National Heritage Areas are designated by Congress as places where natural, cultural,
and historic resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally important landscape.
Through their resources, National Heritage Areas tell nationally important stories that
celebrate our nation’s diverse heritage. The National Park Service acts as a partner
in the Heritage Area, providing technical, planning, and limited financial assistance
but the decision-making authority rests with local people and organizations. Through
annual Congressional appropriations, each Heritage Area is authorized to receive up
to $1 million annually for a set period of time, although appropriations of $150,000 to
$750,000 are more typical.
Work with your U.S. Congressman and Senators to create and introduce the authorizing
legislation to create a Camden Expedition National Heritage Area. If realized, it would
bring the Campaign sites together like nothing that has ever been done.
2 National Heritage Areas, www.nps.gov/history/heritageareas/FAQ/
95
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The Camden Campaign meets the National Heritage Area criteria. The landscape has
nationally distinctive natural, cultural, historic, and scenic resources that together tell
a unique story about our country. That the Camden Expedition already has obtained
National Historic Landmark status should help propel the legislation.
LAND PROTECTION OPTIONS
As a general rule, there are only two ways to protect battlefield land: purchase in fee
simple or with a conservation easement. The best way to protect land and to guarantee
access and the opportunity to interpret it is to own the land. Ownership insures control. A
combination of purchase and a conservation easement insures protection of the property
in perpetuity.
Easement
Easements offer the means to preserve land without owning it. This option keeps the
land on the tax rolls, though generally at a lower tax rate. Easements can be purchased
from the landowner or the landowner can donate the easement. Two types of easements
could be pursued—Historic Preservation or Conservation Easements and Agricultural
Conservation Easements. Both require landowner consent and some funding is available
for both options. In Arkansas it is necessary for property to be listed in the National
Register of Historic Places for the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program to hold the
easement. That will not be a problem for the over 1,900 acres of the Jenkins’ Ferry
battlefield that are listed.
A conservation easement protects battlefield land in perpetuity, that is, forever. The
easement would be attached to the deed and would remain with the land in the event it is
sold.
Conservation easements allow landowners to preserve or limit current
and future uses of their farms and forests. Under certain circumstances,
they can provide substantial tax benefits for landowners and/or allow
landowners to convert some of their equity into cash. They provide
an attractive option for landowners and land trusts because they allow
landowners to retain ownership while foregoing the rights to future
development. Thus, through conservation easements, landowners can
achieve conservation or preservation aims while retaining limited
rights to continued use of their property for themselves and for future
generations. To do so, conservation easements should be carefully tailored
to fit individual circumstances and should be made flexible enough to
accommodate changes in farm and forest practices and conditions. In
96
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
addition, tax incentives are contingent both upon individual landowner
circumstances and a properly structured easement. Landowners are
strongly encouraged to retain competent professionals to assist them
through the process.3
Easements should not be viewed as an alternative to the purchase of priority land or land
necessary for interpretive purposes. It is often necessary to own land in order to develop
an interpretive program that allows people access to the resource. Easements are most
often used to protect large tracts of land that will not necessarily be used for on-site
interpretation. Using easements to protect viewshed is common at battlefields where there
is open land. Over much of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield the viewshed is limited due to
heavy forestation but using easements to provide a buffer for priority land is an excellent
use of this preservation tool.
Purchasing Battlefield Land
The best way to protect land is to buy it in fee simple. The combination of purchase and
easement insures that the property will be protected and used in the way that respects
the resource. Funding through the Land and Water Conservation Trust Fund, which is
the source of money for the Civil War Battlefield Preservation Program can be used to
buy easements. The Civil War Trust has helped in the past to protect battlefield land in
Arkansas. Because the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield qualifies for the LWCF funding, it is
likely that the Civil War Trust will be willing to assist any organization working to protect
the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) monies are available to help states and local
communities acquire and preserve threatened Civil War battlefield land. The American
Battlefield Protection Program administers the LWCF grant program.
Civil War Battlefield Acquisition Grants are only awarded to state and local governments.
If the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield wants to apply for LWCF monies to purchase
battlefield land it would have to do so in partnership with Grant County government or
the State of Arkansas.
LWCF Civil War Battlefield Acquisition Grants provide 50% of the appraised value of
the property. The funding must be matched dollar-for-dollar with non-federal monies. The
3 Christopher D. Clark, Larry Tankersley, George F. Smith and Daniel Starnes, Farm and Forest Land
Preservation with Conservation Easements, Southern Regional Water Program, Knoxville, Tennessee,
2007, p. 10.
97
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
grant funding is awarded through a competitive application process. The LWCF funding
will pay for fee simple purchase of land or the acquisition of permanent, protective
easements. In order to be eligible a battlefield must be listed in the Civil War Sites
Advisory Commission’s Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields (1993). The Battle
of Jenkins’ Ferry is listed in that report and its priority ranking was upgraded in the Draft
of the Update to Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War
Battlefields. See Appendix 2 for more information on this program.
Other Preservation Tools
Developing good relationships with landowners opens the door to other tools that might
prove helpful in preserving the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield: right of first refusal, options and
bargain sales.
RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL
A right of first refusal is a legally binding agreement that specifies a given timespan
during which the holder of the agreement has the opportunity to purchase the land at a
price determined by the landowner. It is a very effective proactive tool. Obtaining a right
of first refusal insures that the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield or its partners are
given the opportunity to purchase the property when it comes up for sale. Beginning a
dialogue with the landowners and developing a rapport with them makes it more likely
that the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield would be able to obtain a right of first refusal
option on priority battlefield land. Having this option also gives the organization more
time to put together the necessary funding.
OPTIONS
Options are another tool that can be used when a willing landowner has been identified.
The purchase of an option would provide the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield time to
raise the money to purchase the land. The purchase of an option insures that the land will
not be sold for the length of the option while the funds are being raised. However, if the
funds cannot be raised within the prescribed time the cost of the option is lost. The good
news is that the cost of the option can be applied to the cost of the land.
BARGAIN SALE
The purchase of land at a price below fair market value is called a bargain sale. If the
Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield purchased land at a bargain sale the owner would be
entitled to state and federal tax deductions for a charitable contribution. This type of sale
is dependent upon the seller’s willingness to take a loss in order to get the tax benefit. The
tax deduction is based on the difference between fair market value and the selling price.
98
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
A conservation easement must be placed on all property purchased using Land and Water
Conservation Fund monies. The Arkansas Historic Preservation Program can hold an
easement on battlefield property only if that property is listed in the National Register of
Historic Places.
EMBRACE THE PLAN
A plan helps the preservation partners find the best way to preserve a battlefield. It
identifies areas that should be protected and offers ideas and recommendations on how
that can be accomplished. Having a plan demonstrates to landowners, potential partners
and funders that the Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield is committed to and prepared
to undertake the challenge of preserving one of Arkansas’ most significant Civil War
battlefields.
PRIORITY LAND FOR PRESERVATION
This preservation plan targets three discontiguous areas where significant actions took
place: the site of the first engagement on April 29, 1864; the main engagement area of
April 30, 1864; and the May 1, 1864, burning field. The parcels to be protected have
been prioritized as high, medium and low priorities. The higher the priority, the closer the
parcel is associated with combat or other significant military action, such as the burning
field. A list of the priority parcels is included with the description of each area; maps
showing parcel locations are below.
This plan identified 8,709.33 acres to be preserved. Approximately 3,500 acres is in
the Core Area of the battlefield, the remainder is in the Study Area. The choice of the
three sites was made in consultation with the board of the Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry
Battlefield and upon the examination of the historical record. Parcels have been assigned
high, medium or low ranking but if the opportunity to acquire a lower priority parcel
arises— it comes up for sale or someone wishes to donate it or have a conservation
easement placed on it—that opportunity should be pursued. Any opportunity to preserve
any battlefield land should be taken, no matter what the priority of a particular parcel.
BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY – THE FIRST ENGAGEMENT SITE
The First Engagement Site is located in north Dallas and south Grant counties. The April
29, 1864, engagement began as skirmishing between the lead elements of the Confederate
army and the rearguard of the Union army. The action quickly became an artillery duel
and then turned into a running fight that ended in the early evening on the edge of the
Saline River bottom.
99
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The initial engagement was fought across the
Guesses Creek floodplain with both sides firing
artillery from the ridges above, the Confederates
from the west side of the creek and the Union
from the east. The military road, which the Union
army had been following from Tulip, Arkansas,
bisected the engagement area.
Figure 68: Guesses Creek in the First
Engagement Site.
Figure 69: Phillips Trail, the old military
road, in Dallas County.
Figure 70: This gate marks the location of
the Cannonball House.
Figure 71: This concrete porch is all that
remains of the Giles house.
The natural features that defined the engagement
remain. The ridges remain and Guesses Creek
meanders between them northeast toward Leola
(Figure 68). The route of the old military road
remains, though it goes by several names: south
of its intersection with Dallas County 409 near the
site of the Cannonball House it is Phillips Trail
(a private road); then it is Dallas County 409 to
the Grant County Line, where it becomes Grant
County 1. The road is not paved until it reaches
Leola (Figure 69).
The site of the Cannonball House is on a broad
plateau on the east side of Dallas County 409
(Figure 70). In this area and to the west the Union
army formed their line, unlimbered their artillery,
and fired on the Confederates. There are perhaps
160 acres east of Dallas County 409 that are
in pasture, including the house site; the rest is
wooded, most in planted pine.
Approximately one-quarter mile northeast of the
Cannonball House, on the west side of Dallas
County 409, is the site of the Giles house (Figure
71). This is thought to be the area where the
Union rearguard formed its second line. The area
where the house stood and the yard that once
surrounded it is open.
100
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
The First Engagement Site retains excellent integrity and should be listed in the National
Register of Historic Places. It is worthy of preservation, and if preserved and interpreted
would help tell the story of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry.
Threats
This area of the battlefield is not highly populated, though it is near the small town of
Leola. Increasingly, five-to-ten acre residential house sites are being carved out of the
area. Though much of the land is still in large parcels of timber, it is no longer owned by
paper or timber companies but by individuals who may be more interested in or willing to
sell house sites along road frontage. As this becomes more common it will whittle away
the battlefield.
Much of the area is in planted pine that will eventually be harvested. Cutting trees and
removing timber damages the ground to some degree, and has the potential to negatively
impact archeological deposits. Phillips Trail, a private road, is protected by a locked gate,
and very little metal detecting has been done in this area of the engagement site.
Priority Parcels
There are twelve parcels totaling 1,386.58 acres associated with the First Engagement
Site (Figure 72). The high priority parcels are in what for this plan has been designated
the Core Area of the engagement site (Figure 72). Though not designated Core Area when
it was resurveyed, it is believed that this is the area where fighting occurred in the early
afternoon of April 29, 1864. The high priority parcels encompass some 590 acres. This
land should be purchased in fee simple. The 354.08 acres of medium priority and 442.5
acres of low priority land is that within one-quarter to one-half mile of the Core Area. It is
recommended that this property be protected with conservation easements.
Figure 73: The Cannonball House ca.1967. From
Goolsby”The Lost Houses of Jenkins Ferry,”Grassroots: Journal of the Grant County Museum, August
1999.
101
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
First Engagement Site Priority Parcels
Parcel
Identifier
County
Parcel No.
1
Dallas
001-04871-000
432.500
40.000
80.000
312.500
2
Dallas
001-04872-001
170.000
80.000
40.000
50.000
3
Dallas
001-04875-000
22.900
22.900
4
Dallas
001-04875-001
7.100
7.100
5
Dallas
001-04880-000
40.000
40.000
6
Dallas
001-04881-000
314.080
160.000
154.080
7
Dallas
001-04882-000
40.000
40.000
8
Dallas
001-04885-000
80.000
80.000
9
Dallas
001-04886-000
120.000
80.000
40.000
10
Dallas
001-04888-000
40.000
40.000
11
Grant
001-07991-000
80.000
80.000
12
Grant
001-07993-000
40.000
40.000
Total
1386.580
590.000
354.080
442.500
Total Acres
High
Medium
Low
Priority Acres Priority Acres Priority Acres
102
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
34
35
Grant Co
1
12
G R A N T COU N T Y
DA L LA S COUN T Y
5
6
11
T6N R15W
T7N R15W
4
3
Dallas Co
409
2
7
The military
road
3
2
1
9
8
10
Dallas Co
409
10
Core Area boundary
11
4
Parcel Boundary
High priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
Parcel Identifier
11
Section Number
Section line
Figure 72: Priority Parcels in the April 29, 1864, First Engagement Site.
103
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY – MAIN ENGAGEMENT SITE
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry began in the early morning hours of April 30, 1864, and
lasted into the day. Union soldiers in the Saline River bottom held off numerous assaults
by Confederate cavalry and infantry before they crossed the river, burned their pontoon
bridge, and continued their retreat to Little Rock.
The main engagement site as defined by the 2009 resurvey of the Civil War Sites
Advisory Commission battlefields completed by the Arkansas Historic Preservation
Program (now in draft form) determined that the Core Area is approximately 2.14 miles
wide and stretches about 3.25 miles, from a ridgeline in the south to just north of the
Saline River (Figure 74). For the most part the Core Area is in the Saline River bottom.
Figure 74: Core Area of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield (outlined in red) as defined by the American
Battlefield Protection Program in 2009.
The area is wooded, with both planted pines and hardwoods. Traces of the old military
road are extant. Other than scattered deer stands, logging roads, and a modern hunting
camp, there are no cultural features in the bottom (Figures 75 and 76). It is likely,
however, that there are archeological remains associated with the houses mentioned in
104
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
battle accounts. Metal detector hobbyists have
hunted the battlefield for the past 40 years and,
from conversations with them it is estimated that
several thousand artifacts have been removed.
Figure 75: The cleared fields in the Saline
bottom are now covered in hardwoods.
Figure 76: A hunting camp located on the
battlefield.
Threats
The most significant long-term threat to
the battlefield is residential development.
Sheridan is 34 miles from Little Rock and 25
miles from Pine Bluff. Leola is 50 miles from
Little Rock and 39 from Pine Bluff. A bypass
around Sheridan, which has considerable traffic
congestion during peak drive times, is nearing
completion. This road will make living in Grant
County and working in Little Rock or Pine Bluff
more appealing to commuters. It is an easy
commute from Sheridan to Little Rock via U.S.
167, a four-lane highway that intersects I-430
just south of Little Rock. Sheridan is connected
to Pine Bluff by U.S. 270, a four-lane highway
that intersects with I-530 at Pine Bluff.
A number of people already make the drive from Sheridan to these cities and that number
will increase with road improvements. Little Rock is the largest city in Arkansas, and
Pine Bluff the ninth largest. Both offer a wide range of employment opportunities that
cannot be found in Grant County. However, Grant County offers a slower pace of life, a
rural setting, and lower taxes than Little Rock or Pine Bluff, which would make living
there appealing to many individuals. In the long-term it is likely that Grant County will
become a bedroom community to Little Rock and Pine Bluff, which will put pressure on
the battlefield area in terms of both residential and associated commercial development.
Much of the battlefield is in planted pine that will eventually be harvested, causing some
degree of damage to the ground. There are no prepared earthworks associated with this
engagement; the tree and log breastworks that the Union army built disappeared long
ago. It’s unlikely that logging activity would permanently harm the battlefield but it will
probably damage archeological resources.
Much of the land in this part of the battlefield is leased to hunting clubs. The leases are
105
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
annual arrangements; they are profitable for the landowner and popular with hunting
clubs. One lease in the battlefield has a house and outbuildings built by one such
club. The fact of these leases, their profitability to the landowners and the tradition of
the hunting clubs are issues that will have to be taken into consideration during the
preservation/land purchase process.
Priority Parcels
It is recommended that 51 parcels totaling 6,106.060 be preserved in this area of the
battlefield. This is substantially more land than the Core Area of 3,078.09 acres defined in
the 2009 resurvey. The recommended area includes parcels that create a buffer outside of
the Core Area and will preserve viewshed (Figure 77).
The Core Area as defined above is bisected by SR 46. After visiting the battlefield with
several metal detector hobbyists it was determined that combat was confined west of
SR 46. The historic route of Old Cunningham Road, which Confederate soldiers used to
access the bottom in the final assault on the Union line, is believed to be east of SR 46
and helps define the Core Area.
The highest priority land is between the ridgeline at the south end of the main
engagement, Tucker field in the north, Cox Creek on the west and SR 46 on the east. This
is the hallowed ground, the area of the most intense fighting. In this area are 29 parcels
totaling 1,790.750 acres of high priority battlefield land. The purchase of this property
would preserve and make it possible to interpret the most significant portion of the
battlefield, including most of the NHL boundary.
Nineteen parcels totaling 2,251.3 acres of land are medium priority. Some are in the 2009
Core Area boundary and the 1994 NHL boundary but are east of SR 46. These parcels
should be considered the highest priority of this second tier and should probably be
purchased in fee simple. Twelve low priority parcels, 2054.010 acres, should be protected
with conservation easements.
106
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Main Engagement Site Priority Parcels
Parcel
Identifier
County
Parcel No.
1
Grant
001-06468-000
39.710
39.710
2
Grant
001-06468-002
133.500
133.500
3
Grant
001-06468-003
83.300
83.300
4
Grant
001-06468-004
259.000
259.000
5
Grant
001-06469-000
47.800
47.800
6
Grant
001-06470-000
47.720
47.720
7
Grant
001-06471-001
342.130
342.130
8
Grant
001-06471-003
24.000
24.000
9
Grant
001-06471-004
60.000
60.000
10
Grant
001-06471-005
90.000
90.000
11
Grant
001-06473-000
14.870
14.870
12
Grant
001-06529-000
250.710
160.000
90.710
13
Grant
001-06529-001
315.000
160.000
155.000
14
Grant
001-06531-000
91.390
91.390
15
Grant
001-06531-001
240.000
120.000
120.000
16
Grant
001-06532-000
48.170
48.170
17
Grant
001-06533-000
110.000
110.000
18
Grant
001-06533-001
146.850
146.850
19
Grant
001-06534-000
622.420
320.000
302.420
20
Grant
001-06536-000
600.000
40.000
560.000
21
Grant
001-07702-000
640.000
160.000
160.000
320.000
22
Grant
001-07703-000
80.000
80.000
23
Grant
001-07704-000
40.000
40.000
24
Grant
001-07705-000
40.000
40.000
25
Grant
001-07706-000
40.000
40.000
26
Grant
001-07706-001
40.000
40.000
27
Grant
001-07707-000
120.000
120.000
Total Acres
High
Priority Acres
Medium
Low
Priority Acres Priority Acres
107
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Main Engagement Site Priority Parcels
Parcel
Identifier
County
Parcel No.
28
Grant
001-07708-000
40.000
40.000
29
Grant
001-07709-000
40.000
40.000
30
Grant
001-07710-000
40.000
40.000
31
Grant
001-07711-000
110.080
110.080
32
Grant
001-07711-001
9.920
9.920
33
Grant
001-07712-000
40.000
40.000
34
Grant
001-07713-000
480.000
80.000
40.000
360.000
35
Grant
001-07714-000
40.000
40.000
36
Grant
001-07715-000
37.680
37.680
37
Grant
001-07715-001
39.830
39.830
38
Grant
001-07716-000
3.180
3.180
39
Grant
001-07716-001
36.820
36.820
40
Grant
001-07763-000
26.000
26.000
41
Grant
001-07764-000
49.000
49.000
42
Grant
001-07806-000
80.000
80.000
43
Grant
001-07807-000
40.000
40.000
44
Grant
001-07808-000
40.000
40.000
45
Grant
001-07809-000
80.000
80.000
46
Grant
001-07810-000
60.000
60.000
47
Grant
001-07813-000
116.400
116.400
48
Grant
001-07813-001
38.580
38.580
49
Grant
001-07820-000
10.000
10.000
50
Grant
001-07821-000
2.000
2.000
51
Grant
001-07822-000
80.000
80.000
Total
6106.060
1790.750
2251.300
2064.010
Total Acres
High
Priority Acres
Medium
Low
Priority Acres Priority Acres
108
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Insert Map (Figure 77) Here
109
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY – THE BURNING FIELD
After the Union army crossed the Saline River on April 30, 1862, they struggled for
two miles through the worst terrain that Gen. Frederick Steele’s Chief Engineer, Capt.
Junius Wheeler, had ever seen, before making camp on high ground. The Confederates
did not pursue the Union army, which allowed Steele’s force to regroup. That night the
Union army burned over 200 wagons and an unknown quantity of surplus supplies.
They continued on to Little Rock the next day with 200 wagons of what had begun as
an 800-wagon supply train. The wagons had been whittled down over the course of the
campaign: Steele lost 177 at Poison Spring, 61 at Marks’ Mill, and 92 when the army
crossed the Ouachita River on April 26, 1864.4
It is unclear where exactly the wagons were burned, and if they were driven into a field
and burned or burned in the road. It is also unclear how many were destroyed earlier.
By the time Steele’s supply train arrived at the Saline bottom it had been reduced to 470
wagons, and more were lost before it crossed the river. Capt. C.A. Henry reported that
wagons were broken up to help corduroy the road on the far side of the Saline, but he
does not state how many. Regardless, 200 or so wagons would occupy a great deal of
space. These were large vehicles—each was ten feet long and three-and one-half feet
wide and could haul 5,000 pounds. It took six horses or mules to draw each one.
The area known as the burning field is
north of the Dogwood community at the
intersection of SR 46, Grant County 8, and
SR 291. Local informants put the burning
field in the vicinity of Sections 28 and 33,
Township 5 South, Range 14 West. Most
if not all of this property is in planted pine
(Figure 78).
Figure 78: Planted pine in the vicinity of the Burning Field.
Threats
The threats to the burning field are the same
as those for the main engagement site.
Priority Parcels
There are ten parcels of land in the two sections designated as the burning field, a total of
1,216 acres. The issue is that no one knows exactly where in those sections the wagons
were burned. Because an exact location has yet to be determined it is difficult to prioritize
4 O.R., Vol. XXXIV, Series I, Part I, pp. 608-681.
110
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
the parcels. One of the recommendations made in Chapter 10 is that an archaeological
investigation be conducted of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield. That investigation would
include a search for the burning field (Figure 79).
At this point, the entire area identified as the burning field is high priority. Once an
archaeological survey has been completed those working to preserve the battlefield may
choose to focus on the land that contains the archaeological resources as the highest
priority parcels.
Burning Field Priority Parcels
Parcel
Identifier
County
Parcel No.
1
Grant
001-06316-000
640.000
640.000 2
Grant
001-06373-000
556.800
556.800 3
Grant
001-06375-000
19.260
19.260 1216.060
1216.060 Total
Total Acres
High
Priority Acres
Medium
Priority Acres
Low
Priority Acres
111
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
20
21
22
29
28
27
1
46
2
291
32
Moore’s
Chapel
Cemetery
33
34
3
Dogwood
Grant Co
8
46
High priority
2
Medium Priority
Low Priority
Parcel Identifier
Parcel Boundary
11
Section Number
Section line
Figure 79: Priority Parcels for the May 1, 1864, Burning Field.
112
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
INTERPRETING THE BATTLE
113
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
INTERPRETING THE BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY
The mission of the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield is “to protect, preserve and
promote the historical significance of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield through funding and
development of education programs and community outreach efforts, including: tours,
re-enactments, research publications, lectures, workshops and preservation of battlefield
property.” Interpreting the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry and making it possible for visitors to
experience the battlefield firsthand fulfills an important component of the Friends of the
Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield’s mission.
It is not within the scope of this project to develop an interpretive program for the
Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield. Recommendations for interpreting the battle in the shortterm and the direction the interpretive program might take in the future are outlined for
consideration, until such time as a comprehensive interpretive plan can be developed for
the battlefield.
THE VALUE OF INTERPRETATION
Interpretation will help the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield fulfill its mission to
preserve, protect, maintain and interpret the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield by generating
support for the organization and its programs. The purpose of any interpretive program
is to inspire people to go from curiosity: What is this all about?— to awareness: I’ll
think about it — to understanding: I think I care — to care about: I want to help— to
care for: I will help — to stewardship: I will work to protect and preserve this place. The
connections visitors make to the battlefield through interpretive experiences can lead
them to take action.
Some might question whether interpretation can really make a difference. Jay Miller,
former Chief of Interpretation with Arkansas State Parks, saw firsthand what effective
interpretation can do. Old Davidsonville State Park, a small historic site in northern
Arkansas, has river access, a small fishing lake, two dozen campsites, a visitor center
with exhibits about the history of the site, and a small gift shop. The park was failing until
1995, when the site hired its first full-time interpreter. In one year, programs increased
from twenty-two to 109 and visitor contacts from 1,524 to 10,410. Park visitation jumped
from 28,342 to 78,119 and revenue increased from $7,407 to $23,522.1 Old Davidsonville
State Park is not an isolated example. A good interpretive program can transform a site
and attract financial, volunteer, political and administrative support.
EXISTING INTERPRETATION
Presently, only 40 acres of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield are open to the public, all at
Jenkins’ Ferry State Park. Less than four acres are accessible to the visiting public, the
1 Larry Beck and Ted Cable, Interpretation for the 21st Century: Fifteen Guiding Principles for
Interpreting Nature and Culture, Sagamore Publishing, Champaign, Illinois, p. 135.
114
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Figures 80-82: The three interpretive panels
at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park.
rest of the park is south of the Saline
River and access is difficult at best. All is
subject to seasonal flooding. These issues
can be overcome, but they must all be
taken into consideration.
Three panels and an audio component
available via cell phone at the park
interpret the battle. The first panel,
Jenkins’ Ferry State Park, discusses the
park itself and mentions the battle (Figure
80). The second, Red River Campaign
(Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry), interprets the
April 30, 1864 battle (Figure 81). The
third panel, The Saline River Bottom,
discusses the natural history of the river
and bottoms and also mentions the battle
(Figure 82). The audio tour is devoted
to the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. The
monument erected by the Daughters of the
Confederacy recognizes the battle and the
Confederate soldiers who fought and died
there. This is the only interpretation on the
battlefield proper.
Even if there were no issues with access
or flooding at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park,
the interpretation does not offer the kind
of experience that Civil War tourists want.
The battle began over five miles south
of the park and ended four miles to the north. Visitors want to see and experience the
battlefield, and to walk the hallowed ground.
The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield engage in a number of activities that make the
public aware of and interpret the battle. They sponsor local events and have a presence
at those sponsored by others. They give presentations to schools, youth groups and adult
organizations. They are planning a large event for the sesquicentennial of the battle. The
Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield has a good relationship with local newspapers and
the press releases and features they submit appear regularly.
115
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Recommended Actions
To generate youth interest in the history and the battlefield resource, the Friends of
Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield might start a junior Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield for
children between the ages of seven and sixteen. Holding periodic living history and
costumed events at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park—Jenkins’ Ferry Days—would help get
people out to the battlefield. Other actions the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield might
take that could have a profound effect are to develop a Teaching with Historic Places
lesson plan and a simple driving tour of the battlefield that requires no land purchase.
TEACHING WITH HISTORIC PLACES
Education is an important facet of the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield’s mission.
Creating interest in the battle and instilling a sense of the importance of the past in young
people helps create the stewards of tomorrow. Developing a Teaching with Historic
Places lesson plan that meets Arkansas curriculum standards helps teachers integrate the
Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry into their core curriculum.
Teaching with Historic Places (TwHP) is a program of the National Park Service’s
Heritage Education Services office. The program is rooted in the belief that real historic
places generate excitement and curiosity about the people who lived there and the events
that occurred there. Based on sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places,
Teaching with Historic Places promotes places as effective tools for enlivening traditional
classroom instruction.
Teaching with Historic Places lesson plans turn students into historians. They study
primary sources, historical and contemporary photographs, maps, and other documents,
and then search for the history around them. Students
enjoy a historian’s sense of discovery as they learn
about the past by actively examining historic places to
gather information, form and test hypotheses, and piece
together “the big picture.” By seeking out nearby historic
places, students explore the relationship of their own
community’s history to the broader themes that have
shaped this country.
NUMBERED-POST DRIVING TOUR
A numbered-post driving tour of the battle is a simple
and relatively inexpensive way to interpret the Battle
of Jenkins’ Ferry in the short-term. Numbered posts or
simple signs identify each stop (Figure 83). The visitor
stops at a small pull-off or a public parking area and
reads the narrative in the brochure.
Figure 83: Mock-up of tour stop sign
for proposed driving tour.
Tour brochures would be available at the Grant County
116
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Museum, Grant County Chamber of Commerce, and on the Friends of the Battle of
Jenkins’ Ferry website. Advertise the tour by placing brochures in highway rest areas
and visitor centers, local businesses, and motels and other accommodations in Grant and
surrounding counties. Funds to produce and print the brochure are available from the
Arkansas Sesquicentennial Commission and the Arkansas Humanities Council.
The nine-stop driving tour outlined below begins at the Grant County Museum in Sheridan. On leaving the museum, visitors will be directed to drive south of Leola and into
Dallas County to the site of the Cannonball House and the first engagement of the Battle
of Jenkins’ Ferry. The tour ends at Moore’s Chapel Cemetery, where the burning field will
be interpreted (Figure 84).
The most significant issue with establishing the tour is parking. Each stop must be placed
where the visitor can safely pull over to read the brochure. The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry
Battlefield will have to work with landowners to obtain permission for tour stops to be
placed on their property and, if necessary, for simple graveled pull-offs to be created.
TOUR STOP 1 – GRANT COUNTY MUSEUM, SHERIDAN
The museum’s Jenkins’ Ferry Gallery exhibits feature maps, artifacts and panels
interpreting the April 30, 1864, Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. The exhibits provide an overview
of the battle that will help visitors better understand what they see on the driving tour.
TOUR STOP 2 – ENGAGEMENT OF APRIL 29 AND THE CANNONBALL HOUSE
The action that began the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry could be interpreted at a pull-off at
or near the site of the Cannonball House. An artillery duel was fought between Union
troops on the ridge upon which the visitor would be parked, and Confederate troops
who occupied the ridge to the west. The brochure could include a photograph of the
Cannonball House and briefly recount the engagement and the story of the cannonball
that was shot through the structure.
TOUR STOP 3 – ENGAGEMENT OF APRIL 29: THE SECOND UNION LINE NEAR THE GILES
HOUSE
This stop, at a pull-off at the site of the Giles house, would interpret the second Union
line and the leapfrogging action the Union army used to hold off the Confederate
vanguard until their army reached the Saline River bottom. The brochure could feature a
photo of the Giles house, which was standing at the time of the battle.
TOUR STOP 4 – RUFUS TAYLOR HOUSE
This stop would interpret the only extant Civil War-era house on the battlefield area. The
brochure would tell visitors that the Taylor house was typical of houses in the area, which
were modest and not the stereotypical “plantation” house. A short history of the Taylor
family might also be included.
117
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
291
Prattsville
Sheridan
270
1
46
46
9
291
167
46
Dogwood
Cross
Roads
Dogwood
8
35
Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park
Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park
8
229
46
6
7
5
4
Leola
46
3
G R A N T
DAL L AS
229
2
0
1
2
3
MILES
Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry Driving Tour
1. Grant County Museum: Jenkins‘ Ferry Gallery
2. Engagement of April 29 and the Cannonball House
3. Engagement of April 29: Second Union line
4. Rufus Taylor House
5. Taylor Cemetery: Family farms become a battleground
6. Confederate Staging Area
7. The Main Engagement
8. Jenkins’ Ferry State Park: Pontoon bridge and ferry crossing
9. The Burning Field and retreat to Little Rock
Figure 84: Route of proposed driving tour.
118
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
TOUR STOP 5 – TAYLOR CEMETERY: FAMILY FARMS BECOME A BATTLEGROUND
Taylor Cemetery provides an opportunity to interpret some of the families—Taylor, Jenkins,
Carver, Dortch and others—that lived in the area at the time of the battle. If permission cannot
be obtained to place a pull-off at the Taylor house, the cemetery could be an alternate stop and
motorists instructed at Tour Stop 4 to look at the house as they pass it.
TOUR STOP 6 – CONFEDERATE STAGING AREA
A pull-off on Grant County 6, on the ridge before the road desends into the Saline River
bottom, would interpret the end of the battle on April 29, 1864, and the beginning of the
battle on April 30, 1864, when the Confederates used this high area as a staging ground.
TOUR STOP 7 – THE MAIN ENGAGEMENT
The April 30, 1864, Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry can be interpreted from an existing pull-off
on SR 46, where there are plans to place a historical marker. The brochure would describe
the terrain, weather conditions, and battle in the Saline River bottom during the day of
April 30, 1864.
TOUR STOP 8 – JENKINS’ FERRY STATE PARK: PONTOON BRIDGE AND FERRY CROSSING
The Union pontoon bridge and Jenkins’ Ferry will be interpreted at Jenkins’ Ferry State
Park. The brochure will augment, not repeat, the existing interpretation at the park (the
panel and the cell phone audio). Visitors will be urged to leave their cars and look at the
historic ferry crossing and road and the United Daughters of the Confederacy monument
erected in 1928.
TOUR STOP 9 – THE BURNING FIELD AND THE RETREAT TO LITTLE ROCK
Visitors will stop at the parking area at Moore’s Chapel Cemetery to learn about the
decision to burn the wagons and their contents, how many wagons were burned and spent
horses and mules turned loose, and the decision to send the wounded and the Freedom
Seekers to Pine Bluff.
INTERPRETING THE MAIN ENGAGEMENT IN THE BOTTOM
In 2004, Jay Miller, then Chief of Interpretation for Arkansas State Parks, outlined a
series of trails interpreting the April 30, 1864, Main Engagement in the Saline River
bottom. Miller proposed three pedestrian loop trails taking visitors into the bottom and
the area of the cleared fields. The trails would intersect a low-maintenance driving trail
that would meet Americans with Disabilities Act standards.2 The following outline uses
Miller’s plan as a starting point. It assumes that the necessary land has been obtained for
the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield to construct trails and install interpretation after
receiving clearance from the State Historic Preservation Office.
A larger on-site interpretive program will define the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry as beginning
on the high ground in the south end of the site and ending at the river. This plan envisions
2 Jay S. Miller, “Jenkins’ Ferry, A Plan,” Draft master plan concept, Arkansas State Parks, Little Rock,
Arkansas, December 6, 2004, Copy in possession of the author.
119
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
four primary interpretive locations, a multi-use trail with five interpreted sites, and four
pedestrian trails.
Primary Interpretive Locations
The main engagement and the Union escape across the Saline River will be interpreted
at four locations not subject to seasonal flooding that can be visited by the public yearround. These locations will be fully accessible, meeting ADA guidelines (Figure 85).
PRIMARY INTERPRETIVE LOCATION 1 - THE HIGH GROUND
The engagement of April 29, 1864, ended on this high ground and the main engagement
the following day began here. On April 30, 1864, Confederate generals stood on this
ground and directed five major assaults into the bottom, hoping to break the Union line
and capture the Union army. Waysides would interpret the battle from the Confederate
perspective, their strategy and why they failed to overcome the Union defense.
PRIMARY SITE 2 - THE MAIN ENGAGEMENT
The Union army in the bottom was outnumbered but Union strategy forced the
Confederates to attack in a narrow area, making it impossible for them to use their
larger numbers to their advantage. Union forces successfully repulsed five attacks.
The Confederate forces pulled back and the Union infantry in the bottom turned
toward Jenkins’ Ferry. Waysides would interpret the main engagement from the Union
perspective, their response to the Confederate attacks and the successful strategy that
enabled them to reach the Saline River.
PRIMARY SITE 3 - THE UNION ARMY CROSSES THE SALINE
While the Union infantry held the Confederates at bay, the rest of the Union force—the
cavalry, artillery and supply train—and the African American refugees that accompanied
it, began crossing the Saline River. They used a bridge constructed of wood salvaged
from nearby buildings and some of the Union wagons, supported by India-rubber
pontoons. After the Confederates withdrew, the Union infantry crossed the Saline.
Interpretation at Jenkins’ Ferry State Park would focus on the construction and use of the
pontoon bridge.
PRIMARY SITE 4 – THE BURNING FIELD
After crossing the Saline River, the Union army struggled through the bottoms on the
north side of the river. Two miles north they finally reached high ground. Here the Union
army burned over 200 wagons. The wounded and the Freedom Seekers were detached
from the main force and put on the road to Pine Bluff. The rest of the army marched
toward Little Rock. Interpretation would address events at the burning field and the
Freedom Seekers, also called Contraband, who had followed the army.
120
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
291
4
Dogwood
Jenkins’ Ferry
State Park
46
8
3
2
229
46
1
6
1
0
Leola
MILE
Primary Interpretive Locations
1. The High Ground
2. The Main Engagement
3. The Union Army Crosses the Saline
4. The Burning Field
Figure 85: Primary interpretive locations
121
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Interpretation in the Bottom
Visitors will access the battlefield in the bottom via a graveled multi-use trail and four
pedestrian trails. Five locations along the multi-use trail will interpret the military action
in the bottom. The Arkansas Historic Preservation Program will review and approve
construction plans to ensure that the cultural resources in the bottom are not compromised
by trail-building activities. The proposed archeological project should locate the most
significant cultural resources, providing the information necessary so as to avoid
negatively impacting the resources.
The Saline River bottom presents a number of challenges to building and maintaining
trails. Because road and trail surfaces must be able to tolerate periodic flooding, simple
graveled surfaces will probably be best. There has been mention of constructing a
boardwalk through the bottoms. While it might be possible, such an undertaking would
be very expensive to construct and maintain and would impact the visual integrity of the
battlefield needlessly. Fortunately, there are a number of options for interpretive signage
that can tolerate being submerged.
At times, flooding will render the trails in the bottom inaccessible. Visitors should be
made aware of this on the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield website, in the tour the
brochure and in promotional materials. The Chamber of Commerce should also be
notified when the trails are closed. In the interest of safety, visitors should also be told
that poisonous snakes are common in the bottom and that they should be alert to their
presence and should wear appropriate footwear.
MULTI-USE TRAIL WITH FIVE INTERPRETIVE LOCATIONS
The multi-use trail, for use by pedestrians and vehicles, will follow or parallel the route
of the military road. As Miller recommended in 2004, the trail should be wide enough
only to allow a vehicle and pedestrian to safely share it; the forest should come up to its
edges. Removing only those trees necessary will also minimize disturbance. Construction
will have to be done in such a way that it does not damage the historic road trace. The
trail should be gated so that it can be closed off when the park is closed and/or the water
is too high for access.
The web of streams, sloughs and ponds south of the Saline River makes it impractical to
take the multi-use trail all the way to the river and the site of Jenkins’ Ferry. Construction
would require building a number of bridges or culverts and would have an adverse affect,
destroying or altering habitat in this environmentally sensitive area.
The multi-use trail will begin west of Primary Site 1, where Grant County 6 drops into
the Saline River bottom, and will pass through the location of the three cleared fields
before diverging from the military road north of the Tucker field and exiting on SR 46 at
Primary Site 2 (Figure 86).
122
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
As envisioned by Miller, five locations in the Saline River bottom will each be interpreted
with one or more waysides. The interpretation at these sites will offer a more detailed
look at the battle and the factors that influenced its outcome. Small parking areas will
allow visitors to exit their vehicles to read the waysides and, if desired, explore the area
on the pedestrian loop trails. The waysides should be fully accessible.
SITE 1 – THE BOTTOM OF THE HIGH GROUND
The engagement of April 29, 1864, ended in this location. A Union regiment remained
a few hundred yards northeast of this location overnight and was withdrawing when the
Confederates attacked the next morning, beginning the main engagement.
SITE 2 – CARVER/JENKINS FIELD
The Carver/Jenkins field is the southernmost of the three cleared fields in the Saline River bottom.
One company of Union infantry held this field on the morning of April 30, 1864. Confederate
cavalry attacked, setting the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry in motion.
SITE 3 – DORTCH FIELD
The Dortch field is the second and most significant of the three agricultural fields.
Between each cleared field was a wooded area. The Union line was in the woods north of
Dortch field. Confederate soldiers marched across the field and attacked. Almost all of the
fighting in the battle took place in this field.
Site 4 – Tucker Field
The Tucker field is the third and northernmost of the three cleared fields. This field
was used as the Union staging ground and a house near the field was used as Maj. Gen.
Frederick Steele’s headquarters and as a field hospital.
SITE 5 – NORTH OF TUCKER FIELD AND SOUTH OF JENKINS’ FERRY LANDING
This location might interpret the construction of the pontoon bridge, the weather and the extreme
difficulty that Union engineers and soldiers had in moving the wagons across the bottom.
PEDESTRIAN TRAILS
Four low-maintenance pedestrian loop trails will allow visitors to experience the
battlefield and the terrain more intimately. These trails also present an opportunity for
additional interpretation not only of the battle, but the natural and cultural history of the
Saline River and the bottoms, which could draw visitors with interests outside of the Civil
War. Three trails will depart from sites along the multi-use trail; the fourth will depart
from the parking area at Primary Site 2, where the multi-use trail ends.
THE GRANNY JENKINS TRAIL
This trail will begin and end at the parking area at Site 2: the Carver/Jenkins Field and
will loop through the area the field occupied. Interpretation will focus on the civilian
story—what the area was like in 1864, the families that lived here, how they lived, and
the impact the battle had on their lives.
123
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
THE DORTCH TRAIL
This trail will begin and end at the parking area at Site 3: The Dortch Field, where the heaviest
fighting of the main engagement took place. Looping through the area the field occupied and to
Cox Creek, it will focus on the military action, the location of the Union and Confederate lines,
the impact of the weather, and the natural features that played a role in the battle—Cox Creek, the
swale and the slough.
THE TUCKER TRAIL
Interpretation on this trail will address Maj. Gen. Frederick Steele’s use of the Mary Tucker house
as his headquarters, the Union field hospital here and the area as the Union staging area. The trail
will begin and end at the parking area at Site 4: The Tucker Field.
THE SALINE RIVER BOTTOMS TRAIL
This trail will begin at the parking area at Primary Site 2 and will go north as far as
practical. It will explore in more detail the obstacle the bottoms posed for the Union and
Confederate armies and will discuss the natural history of this rich ecosystem.
124
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Saline River
11
7
12
3 Primary Site
Jenkins’
Ferry
State Park
46
ek
Cre
Cox
4
5
2
Primary Site
3
13
14
Pedestrian
Loop Trails
17
18
Multi-use Trail
2
1
1
1864
Cleared Fields
Primary Site
Grant Co
6
Grant Co
Core Area
46
6
24
19
20
229
Leola
Figure 86: Location of proposed interpretation in the Saline River bottom.
125
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
126
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
This plan outlines a strategy for preserving the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield based on best
practices developed by the American Battlefield Protection Program, which have been
used successfully across the nation.
APPLY FOR ABPP FUNDING
The next ABPP-funded project that the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield should
pursue is an archeological survey. Archeological projects require landowner permission
and provide an opportunity to build relationships with landowners based on trust
and friendship. Archeology is popular with the public and will garner good publicity,
reinforcing the significance of the battlefield resource with the public. The Friends of
Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield should apply to the ABPP in the next grant cycle for funding
to undertake a professional archeological survey. Research questions should include the
location of the houses on the battlefield in 1864; battle lines associated with the April 29,
1864, First Engagement Site; and the location of the burning field.
FORM PARTNERSHIPS
A coalition of concerned citizens, elected officials and state and federal agencies must
come together for the battlefield preservation effort to work. The Friends of Jenkins’
Ferry Battlefield is a new organization; this is its baptism by fire. The organization has
stepped forward and made it known that it wants to lead. Keep an open dialogue with
Arkansas State Parks and work with them to develop a strategy for park expansion.
Bring the Civil War Trust into the conversation. Let them know what you are doing and
ask them to help you work with Arkansas State Parks to expand the park. The Arkansas
Historic Preservation Program has been involved with the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield for
years. They are a significant partner and can provide technical assistance and act as a
liaison with other state and federal agencies.
GET TO KNOW THE LANDOWNERS
The Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield is composed of thousands of acres owned by a number of
individuals and companies. Some own hundreds of acres, others only a few. Reach out
to the landowners. Share the plan with them and make them aware that their land is part
of the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield, that it is significant historically. Let them know that it’s
important to preserve this land for future generations. Tell them why it is important and
how preservation can benefit the county.
MAINTAIN MOMENTUM
Next year is the sesquicentennial of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. Plans are already in place
for a reenactment and Ed Bearss is scheduled to be in town for the event. The plan will
be in hand and the community will be excited. Use the excitement and positive publicity
to your advantage. Press forward with the preservation effort. Reach out to your partners
and other Camden Expedition National Historic Landmark sites to develop regional tours
and marketing initiatives.
127
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Preserving a battlefield is a long-term project, one that may span decades. The actions
below will help the battlefield preservation project move forward. They follow a general
seven-year timeline, but if an opportunity arises to accomplish an action listed several
years ahead do not hesitate to do so. It is important to take the initiative, be proactive and
seize opportunities when they present themselves.
2013-2014
APPLY FOR ABPP FUNDING
The grant cycle for the American Battlefield Protection Program usually begins in
the fall. Apply for funding to conduct an archeological survey.
BEGIN DIALOGUE WITH LANDOWNERS
In order to conduct the archeological survey landowner permission must be
obtained. This is a great opportunity to meet the landowners and get them
involved in a positive way with the project.
BECOME MORE PROFESSIONAL
The Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield is an all-volunteer organization. The
Arkansas Historic Preservation Program and/or Historic Preservation Foundation
of Arkansas offer courses and workshops in basic historic preservation. The
American Association for State and Local History, a national not-for-profit,
also offers courses, webinars, and inexpensive technical leaflets that can help
in everything from fundraising to interpretation. Take advantage of these
organizations and learn the language of preservation.
CREATE NEW PARTNERSHIPS
The preservation of a battlefield is a daunting undertaking and at first glance
might seem impossible. It’s not. It has been done elsewhere and can be done at
the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield. The opportunity for partnerships exists. Reach out
to organizations and individuals. Ask them to help you and work with you to
preserve the Jenkins’ Ferry battlefield.
EMBRACE THE CIVIL WAR SESQUICENTENNIAL
The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry sesquicentennial commemoration is an opportunity
to garner great publicity and broaden your base of support. With Ed Bearss on the
program this event will draw a big crowd. Invite elected officials, Arkansas State
Parks, and other current and potential partners to participate or to simply come
and enjoy the commemoration. Use the event to educate and inform.
INVESTIGATE CREATING A CAMDEN EXPEDITION NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA
Meet with the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program to discuss creating
a Camden Expedition National Heritage Area. Reach out to Arkansas State
Parks the Nevada County Economic Development Office, the Ouachita County
128
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Historical Society and others with a stake in the battlefields to develop a strategy
and then reach out to your congressman and U.S. senators.
CREATE A BATTLE OF JENKINS’ FERRY DRIVING TOUR
A simple numbered-post driving tour will allow visitors to experience the Battle
of Jenkins’ Ferry in more depth than is now possible. This tour can use existing
public rights-of-way, or work with businesses and landowners to create small
pull-offs to safely let motorists drive the length of the battlefield from Leola to the
burning field.
2015-2016
The sesquicentennial comes to an end and the run-up to the bicentennial begins. Continue
to build relationships with stakeholders, landowners and the community. Market the
battlefield as part of the Camden Expedition.
END THE SESQUICENTENNIAL ON A HIGH NOTE
Use the momentum and interest generated by the last year of the Civil War
sesquicentennial to preserve hallowed ground. As each parcel of land is purchased
issue a press release and have a public event to celebrate the closing.
APPLY FOR ADDITIONAL ARKANSAS CIVIL WAR SESQUICENTENNIAL MARKERS
Apply to the Arkansas Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission to have a marker
placed at or near the burning field and another to mark the site of the April 29,
1864, first engagement of the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry.
CONTINUE PARTNERSHIP BUILDING
Continue to work with partnerships that have been established over the past few
years and seek out new partners to find creative ways to preserve and interpret
the battlefield. A broad coalition will help strengthen the preservation effort.
Partnerships are the lifeblood of any preservation effort. It is too hard, and too
inefficient to go it alone.
CREATE AN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCE
Foster a new generation of preservationists by enlisting local educators to help
develop a Teaching with Historic Places lesson plan and introducing it into the
local 8th-grade curriculum.
CREATE A CAMDEN EXPEDITION TRAIL ORGANIZATION
The sesquicentennial is over but the momentum and interest it generated remain.
Use it to create a new group that will work together to build a greater regional
presence. A Camden Expedition Trail organization could develop trail signage and
an attractive multiple-page brochure to promote and market the trail.
129
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
BEGIN TRACKING VISITORS
Nothing gets the attention of elected officials like economic development. By
now efforts to promote the battlefield have matured and a driving tour and other
interpretation are in place. Work with the Grant County Chamber of Commerce
to track visitors who request information about the battlefield and Civil War sites
and report numbers to the local city and county governments. Conduct informal
surveys of visitors at the state park and at events to generate data on how long
people stay and what local establishments they patronize.
INVITE THE CIVIL WAR TRUST
The Civil War Trust has traveled across the Mississippi River for its annual
meeting. Invite them to come to Arkansas and highlight the Camden Expedition
for their 2016 meeting. The battlefields are pristine and it would be an opportunity
to garner more support for the preservation effort.
APPLY FOR ANOTHER ABPP GRANT
Take note of what has been accomplished over the past three years and determine
what project or projects that ABPP funding might aid. Possibilities include
an interpretive plan, additional archeology, and a National Register boundary
expansion to include the burning field and the April 29, 1864, first engagement
site.
CONTINUE REACHING OUT TO LANDOWNERS
The landowners are the stewards of the land and it’s through them that battlefield
land will be preserved,;it’s important to continue to reach out to them. Invite
landowners to serve on the board of the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield or to
become otherwise involved in an advisory capacity.
DEVELOP FOUR ANNUAL BATTLEFIELD-RELATED EVENTS
Each year have a living history event, a lecture, a reenactment or an immersion
tour or other events to bring people to the battlefield. These activities help keep
the battlefield project alive for the people of the community, keep the preservation
effort in the news, and maintain momentum.
2017-2021
TAKE STOCK OF WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED TO DATE
Take an opportunity to look back at what has been accomplished in the last
five years. Evaluate the status of the battlefield project. If every goal has been
accomplished set new ones and push ahead. If progress did not meet expectations
try to determine why and adjust strategies to compensate.
130
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
TALK TO THE COMMUNITY
Hold a community meeting with the focus on the place of the battlefield in
the community. Ask those attending how they use the battlefield and if they
perceive it as a community asset. If the response is positive find out what more
can and should be done to use, develop and promote it inside and outside of the
community. If the response is negative, ask what should be done to make the
battlefield an asset.
It’s difficult to look too far into the future of this battlefield. There are a number of
variables that might change the course or type of action that might best be used to aid the
preservation process. If Arkansas State Parks takes the lead, the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry
Battlefield might become a fundraising and support organization. If the preservation of
the battlefield falls to the Friends of Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield the focus and actions shift
dramatically. Everything needed to preserve the battlefield is in place, now is the time to
move forward.
131
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
BIBLIOGRAPHY
132
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Battlefield Protection Program. Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields Draft v. 8 for Peer Review. National
Park Service, Washington, DC, 2013.
American Battlefield Protection Program. Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory
Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields: State of Arkansas. National
Park Service, Washington, DC, 2010.
Atkinson, J.H. “The Action at Prairie De Ann.” The Arkansas Historical Quarterly, Vol. ,
XIX, No.1, Spring 1960.
Baker, Don and Edwin C. Bearss. “Camden Expedition Sites.” National Historic
Landmark Nomination. November 29, 1993, on file at Arkansas Historic Preservation
Program, Little Rock, Arkansas.
“Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry Was Fought On April 30, 1864.” The Advocate (Fordyce,
Arkansas), March 30, 1938.
Bearss, Edwin C. Steele’s Retreat from Camden & the Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry. Reprint
edition. Civil War Roundtable Associates, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1990.
Beck, Larry and Ted Cable. Interpretation for the 21st Century: Fifteen Guiding
Principles for Interpreting Nature and Culture. Sagamore Publishing, Champaign,
Illinois.
Blessington, Joseph Palmer. The Campaigns of Walker’s Texas Division. Reprint edition.
State House Press, Austin, Texas, 1994.
Bragg, Dr. J.N. “The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry.” in M.A. Elliott, The Garden of Memory:
Stories of the Civil War as told by Veterans and Daughters of the Confederacy. Reprint
edition. The Hurley Co., Inc., Camden, Arkansas, 1976.
Chapman Brothers. Portrait and Biographical Album of Mahaska County, Iowa.
Chapman Brothers, Chicago, Illinois, 1887.
Clark, Christopher D. Larry Tankersley, George F. Smith and Daniel Starnes. Farm
and Forest Land Preservation with Conservation Easements, Southern Regional Water
Program, Knoxville, Tennessee, 2007.
Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. Civil War Sites Advisory Commission: Report on
the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields. Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, Washington,
133
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
DC, 1993.
Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. Civil War Sites Advisory Commission: Report on
the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, Technical Vol. II: Battlefield Summaries. Civil War
Sites Advisory Commission, Washington, DC, 1993.
Crawford, Samuel J. Kansas in the Sixties. Reprint edition. Kansas Heritage Press,
Ottawa, Kansas, 1994.
DeBlack, Thomas A. With Fire and Sword: Arkansas 1861-1874. University of Arkansas
Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2003.
Evans, Clement A., editor. Confederate Military History, Vol. 9: Missouri. Confederate
Publishing Company, Atlanta, Georgia, 1899.
Fonzo, Stephen. Documentary and Landscape Analysis of the Buckland Mills Battlefield
(Va042). Buckland Preservation Society, Gainesville, Virginia, 2008.
Forsyth, Michael J. The Camden Expedition of 1864 and the Opportunity Lost by the
Confederacy to Change the Civil War. McFarland & Company, Jefferson, North Carolina,
2003.
Friends of the Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield website. www.jenkinsferry.com.
Goolsby, Elwin L. “The Lost Houses of Jenkins Ferry.” Grassroots: Journal of the Grant
County Museum, Sheridan, Arkansas, August, 1999.
Green, M.J. to Civil War Times Illustrated, July 1, 1984. Copy in possession of the author.
Green, M.J. to Michael Dougan, February 5, 1979. Copy in possession of the author.
Green, Thomas. Personal communication, March 13, 2013.
Haas, Jacob Diary. Unpublished manuscript in the possession of Michael Wilson of
Broomfield, Colorado.
“Jane McWhorter Jenkins, Pioneer, Ran Ferry Alone for 30 Years.” The Malvern
(Arkansas) Daily Record. February 5, 1963.
Jenkins’ Ferry Map. Gilmer Civil War Maps Collection. Southern Historical Collection,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Jenkins’ Ferry State Park. Arkansas Encyclopedia. http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.
net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=1227.
134
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Johnson, Ludwell H. Red River Campaign: Politics & Cotton in the Civil War. The Kent
State University Press, Kent, Ohio, 1993.
Joiner, Gary Dillard. One Damn Blunder From Beginning to End: The Red River
Campaign. SR Books, Lanham, Maryland, 2003.
Kennedy, Frances H. and Douglas R. Porter. Dollar$ and Sense of Battlefield Preservation: The Economic Benefits of Protecting Civil War Battlefields. The Preservation Press,
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Washington, DC, 1992.
Kerby, Robert L. Kirby Smith’s Confederacy: The Trans-Mississippi South, 1863-1865.
Columbia University Press, New York, 1972.
Knipping, Mark H. A History of the 27th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry Regiment in the
War of the Rebellion, 1862-1865. http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/WI.She27thVol,
2001.
Latschar, John. “Battlefield Rehabilitation at Gettysburg,” http://www.nps.gov/gett/
parknews/gett-battlefield-rehab.htm, 2009.
Lowe, Richard. Walker’s Texas Division C.S.A.: Greyhounds of the Trans-Mississippi.
Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 2004.
Miller, Jay S. “Jenkins’ Ferry, A Plan.” Draft master plan concept. Arkansas State Parks,
Little Rock, Arkansas, December 6, 2004. Copy in possession of the author.
National Heritage Areas. www.nps.gov/history/heritageareas/FAQ/
National Park Service. National Register Bulletin: How to Prepare National Historic
Landmark Nominations. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC, 1999.
Pilgrim, Michael E. “A Different View on the War: The Civil War Diary of Richard M.
Venable.” Prologue: Quarterly of the National Archives and Records Administration,
Winter 1996, Vol. 28, No. 4.
Pitcock, Cynthia DeHaven and Bill Gurley, editors. I acted from principle: The Civil
War Diary of Dr. William M. McPheeters, Confederate Surgeon in the Trans-Mississippi.
University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2002.
Popchock, Barry. Soldier Boy: The Civil War Letters of Charles O. Musser, 29th Iowa.
University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, Iowa, 1995.
135
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
Porter, Jack E. “Jenkins’ Ferry Battleground.” National Register of Historic Places
Inventory Nomination Form. October 27, 1969, on file at the Arkansas Historic
Preservation Program, Little Rock, Arkansas.
“Recent research uncovers new information on ownership of battlefields at Jenkins’
Ferry.” The Sheridan (Arkansas) Headlight, March 27, 2013.
Richards, Ira D. “The Camden Expedition, March 23-May 3, 1864.” MA Thesis,
University of Arkansas, 1958.
Ruegger, Captain Edward. “Five Weeks of My Army Life.” Wisconsin Magazine of
History, Vol. 37, No. 3, Spring 1954.
Southern Claims Commission. M1 407: Petition submitted by Carver, John M., Claim No.
18910. National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC.
Sperry, A.F. History of the 33d Iowa Infantry Volunteer Regiment 1863-6. University of
Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 1999.
Stuart, A.A. Iowa Colonels and Regiments: Being a History of Iowa Regiments in the War
of the Rebellion. Mills & Co., Des Moines, Iowa, 1865.
Turnbo, Silas Claborn. History of the Twenty-Seventh Arkansas Confederate Infantry.
Arkansas Research, Conway, Arkansas, 1988.
U.S. War Department. The War of the Rebellion: a Compilation of the Official Records of
the Union and Confederate Armies. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC,
1880-1901.
U.S. War Department. List of Staff Officers of the Confederate States Army, 1861-1865.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1891.
Venable, Richard M., service record. M258, Roll 0110, Military Unit: Engineers, CSA,
T-Y. Record Group 109, Combined Service Records of Confederate Soldiers Who Served
in Organizations Raised Directly by the Confederate Government. National Archives and
Records Administration, Washington, DC.
Walker, Joe. Harvest of Death: The Battle of Jenkins’ Ferry, Arkansas. N.P., 2011.
136
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
APPENDIX 1
APPLYING FOR BATTLEFIELD
LAND ACQUISITION GRANTS
137
BATTLEFIELD LAND ACQUISITION GRANTS*
To Preserve America’s Endangered Civil War Battlefields
*As authorized by the American Battlefield Protection Act (16 USC 469k)
Guidelines and Application Instructions
The National Park Service (NPS) makes available funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF) to help States and local communities acquire and preserve threatened Civil War Battlefields. The
Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants (CWBLAG) are administered by the American Battlefield
Protection Program (ABPP) and awarded through a competitive process. Each grant requires a dollar-fordollar non-Federal match. Grants are available to purchase 1) land in fee simple or 2) permanent,
protective interests in land (easements) at Civil War Battlefields listed in the Civil War Sites Advisory
Commission’s (CWSAC) 1993 Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields. Foremost consideration is
given to application packages for acquisition proposals at battlefields defined as Priority I or II sites in the
CWSAC Report. The CWSAC Report and a listing of battlefields’ priority status can be found at on the
Web at http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/abpp/cwsac/cwstab7.html
Potential applicants should carefully review the following guidelines before preparing an application
package. The ABPP also encourages applicants to contact the ABPP staff before submitting an
application package.
Who May Apply?
Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants will be awarded to units of State and local governments. In any case
where a private non-profit organization seeks to acquire battlefield land with assistance from this
program, that organization must apply in partnership with a State or local government agency sponsor.
The government agency may then subgrant the Federal funds to the non-profit organization.
In any case where a local government or a private non-profit organization acquires land or an interest in
land with assistance from this program, it must convey a perpetual protective easement on the land to
the State Historic Preservation Officer or other governmental agency acceptable to the National Park
Service, in accordance with the “Administrative and Funding Requirements” set out below.
What is Funded?
Grants must be used to acquire battlefield land or to acquire a permanent, protective interest (i.e., a
perpetual protective easement) in battlefield land. Additional costs associated with the acquisition – such
as appraisal costs, survey fees, title insurance, and other closing costs – are also eligible grant costs.
Grant funds cannot be used for acquisition of interests in land that is already permanently protected.
Eligible battlefields are those listed in the CWSAC’s 1993 Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields.
Proposals for purchases at CWSAC Priority I and II sites will be given highest consideration. Eligible
acquisitions should lie within the “core” areas of CWSAC battlefields (CWSAC “core” and “study” area
maps are available from the ABPP). Proposals to acquire land outside of the “core” area but within the
“study” area are eligible, but will be considered a lower priority than proposals to purchase “core” area
land only. Land lying entirely outside of the CWSAC “study” area is not eligible for assistance from this
program. If the land to be acquired lies partially within the “study” area and partially outside the “study”
area, a majority (more than 50%) of the land must be within the “study” area in order for the proposal to
be eligible for funding.
No lands located within the legislative boundaries of National Parks may receive funding through
this program.
When Are Grants Awarded?
Ordinarily, the NPS will award the grant as “last money in” prior to acquisition of battlefield land or a
protective easement. This means the grant will provide the final funds necessary to close on the property
or interest in property.
However, if a non-profit organization has borrowed money to acquire land to prevent its imminent sale for
development, and if the land in question is not then protected by public ownership or by a perpetual
protective easement, a State or local government may apply on behalf of the non-profit organization to
retire the debt. Grant assistance for the retirement of such debt must result in either public ownership of
the land or public ownership of a perpetual, protective easement, in accordance with the other terms of
this guidance. The fact of such prior purchase creates no additional priority for funding assistance from
the NPS.
Administrative and Funding Requirements
Matching Share
Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants may be used to pay up to 50% of the total cost—the
sum of both the cost of the land or protective easement to be purchased and any
necessary fees—of the real estate transaction. A dollar-for-dollar non-Federal match is
required. Non-Federal matching share may be in cash, loans (see below), landowner
donations of lands or interests in lands (also partial donations, such as bargain sales
that reduce the cost of the acquisition below its fair market value), or any combination
thereof. Federal appropriations or other Federal grants may not be used to match
Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants. Other Federal grants, however, may be part of the
overall financing package, as long as non-Federal monies are used to match the
Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant portion of the transaction.
Matching funds should be “in-hand” or otherwise committed at the time that the
application package is submitted to the NPS. The NPS will accept application
packages from applicants who have not yet secured their matching share, but it
reserves the right to provide such applicants with a conditional response pending the
availability of matching funds within a specified period of time. Parties committing
matching funds must provide a letter to the applicant verifying their contribution. If third
parties will not commit matching funds without the leverage provided by this grant,
applicants must provide a letter from potential funding sources guaranteeing that
receipt of a Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant will release matching funds.
Applicants who have not yet secured matching funds must submit a specific, credible
plan for raising the necessary matching funds in a timely manner (usually within 120
days of award of Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant). The plan must identify potential
sources of funds and include a proposed schedule for securing funds or commitments
of funds.
For the purposes of this program, applicants may use a loan as non-Federal match.
However, if the loan is secured by the land to be acquired, the lending institution must
agree, in writing, that it will subordinate its own interest in the property to the terms of
the grant, especially the 6(f)(3) "non-conversion" and protective easement
requirements. (See “Legal Requirements” below.) The applicant must include this
explicit, written agreement from the lending institution in the application package. (This
provision is not required if the loan is secured by means other than the land to be
acquired or if the Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant will retire the entire debt.)
Legal
Requirements
The American Battlefield Protection Act (ABPA) of 1996, as amended (16 USC 469k),
authorizes this grant program. The ABPA allows Land and Water Conservation Fund
monies to be used to provide the Federal share of the cost of acquiring interests in
eligible Civil War battlefield land. The ABPA requires that any interest in land acquired
under this program “…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)).” Section 6(f)(3) requires that
any land acquired with these funds be preserved and not converted to other uses
without the express written consent of the Secretary of the Interior.
All grantees must agree to record with or in the deed and record in the easement (as
applicable) the following:
1) That the property was acquired with assistance from Federal Land and Water
Conservation Act funds pursuant to the American Battlefield Protection Act (16
USC 469k);
2) That the property, therefore, is subject to the provisions of Section 6(f)(3) of the
Land and Water Conservation Act;
3) That the property, therefore, may never be converted to other than
preservation uses without the written approval of the Secretary of the Interior;
4) That in the event of a breach of the requirements of Section 6(f)(3)
(unauthorized conversion), the only remedy is immediate compliance with
Section 6(f)(3); and
5) That grant funds cannot be repaid to the NPS to nullify the requirements of
Section 6(f)(3).
Because the Section 6(f)(3) “non-conversion” clause governs the use of the land but is
not necessarily sufficient to protect the historic features of the battlefield, the NPS also
requires additional legal assurances that the battlefield land will be preserved
appropriately.
In cases where a State government agency will acquire and manage the property, the
State must enter into a letter of agreement with the NPS. The letter must assert that
the State will hold the property forever, allow for public access, maintain and protect the
historic features and landscape, restrict development to that needed for interpretation
and visitor access, and pursue site development only after appropriate environmental
and cultural studies are completed to inform best possibilities for low impact design and
construction. If the agency is other than the State Historic Preservation Office, the
letter must also state that pre-development site planning (such as surveys to identify
significant landscape and historic features, and archeological investigations) and final
construction designs are subject to approval by the State Historic Preservation Officer.
The letter must also acknowledge the 6(f)(3) restrictions on the property. This letter will
be recorded with the deed for the property and will run with the land in perpetuity.
In all other cases, grantees or subgrantees must encumber the title to the acquired
battlefield property with a preservation easement, in favor of and enforceable in court
by the State Historic Preservation Officer, or by another government agency acceptable
to the NPS, in perpetuity. Both the letters of agreement and easements must
acknowledge Section 6(f)(3) restrictions and must be sent to the NPS for review and
approval prior to their execution and recordation.
The fundamental purpose of the Land and Water Conservation Fund is to help acquire
and/or develop public outdoor recreation areas. Accordingly, grantees must provide for
public access to lands or interests in lands acquired with assistance from this program,
subject to necessary and reasonable measures on the part of the grantee to protect the
historic features of the battlefield from damage or loss. Where the grantee will place an
easement on the property, the grantee must include language in the easement that
indicates the type and degree of public access to be made available to the property.
At a minimum, lands purchased with LWCF funds must be visible from public rights-ofway.
Appraisals
Before the NPS will release grant funds, the NPS must receive and approve a property
appraisal to the NPS that supports the proposed acquisition cost. The appraisal must
be completed within 180 calendar days of the signing of the contract to purchase the
property. The cost of the appraisal is an allowable cost for this grant.
In September 2006, the Department of Interior’s Appraisal Services Directorate
established requirements for reviewing appraisals funded through grants-in-aid within the
Department. In accordance with these new requirements, Battlefield Land Acquisition
Grant grantees must consult DOI’s Appraisal Services Directorate before selecting an
appraiser for the project. The DOI Appraisal Services Directorate will work with grantees
to find an “assignment qualified” appraiser in a timely fashion and guide grantees through
the appraisal and review process. The DOI Appraisal Services Directorate can be found
on the Web at http://www.nbc.gov/Appraisalservices/
The DOI Appraisal Services Directorate will only accept appraisals completed by a
professional appraiser licensed and certified in accordance with Title XI of the Financial
Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), as amended, in
the State where the appraised property is located. Appraisal preparation,
documentation, and reporting must be made in conformance with the standards and
practices of the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions
(UASFLA), as codified in 49 CFR 24.103, and the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practices (USPAP Standards 1 and 2) published by the Interagency Land
Acquisition Conference. These standards are available from the Department of Justice
on the Web at http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/land-ack/
Grant
Administration
Grantees may not charge costs for administering the project to the grant or to the
required matching share.
Application Package
Application packages must be submitted in hard copy. The ABPP will not accept faxed or e-mailed
application packages. The ABPP will not act on incomplete application packages. The NPS will accept
application packages from government applicants or, where applicable, from the proposed non-profit subgrantee. Each application package must include the following elements:
1) Cover Sheet/Check List
Applicants must complete the Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants Cover Sheet/Check List (attached) with
an original signature of an authorizing official within the applicant’s organization. The name of the
battlefield and its priority listing should be written as they appear in the 1993 CWSAC Report on the
Nation’s Civil War Battlefields [http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp/cwsac/cwstab7.html].
2) Standard Form 424 – Application for Federal Assistance
Applicants must complete Standard Form 424 (SF424). The responsible official of the government sponsor
must sign this form. SF424 can be found on the Web at
http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp/grants/LWCF/LWCFSF424.doc
3) Certification Letter – Acknowledgement of 6(f)(3) and Matching Fund Disclosure
Applicants must provide a letter, signed by or on behalf of the head of the agency or organization (or their
designee), certifying the accuracy of the information included in the application package. This letter must
acknowledge that the applicant understands that Section 6(f)(3) of the Land and Water Conservation Act
of 1965 applies, in perpetuity, to the land proposed for purchase using LWCF funds, and that the
applicant accepts the perpetual land use restrictions of Section 6(f)(3).
The letter must also disclose all sources of secured matching funds making up the required non-Federal
match. In the letter, the applicant must certify that the non-Federal matching funds are either “in-hand” or
otherwise committed at the time of application.
Parties committing matching funds must provide a letter to the applicant verifying their contribution.
These letter(s) must be included with the application package.
If third parties will not commit matching funds without the leverage provided by this grant, applicants must
provide a letter from potential funding sources guaranteeing that receipt of a Battlefield Land Acquisition
Grant will release matching funds.
Applicants who have not yet secured matching funds must submit a specific, credible plan for raising the
necessary matching funds in a timely manner (usually within 120 days of award of Battlefield Land
Acquisition Grant). The plan must identify potential sources of funds and include a proposed schedule for
securing funds or commitments of funds.
For the purposes of this program, applicants may use a loan as non-Federal match. However, if the loan
is secured by the land to be acquired, the lending institution must agree, in writing, that it will subordinate
its own interest in the property to the terms of the grant, especially the 6(f)(3) "non-conversion" and
conservation easement requirements. The applicant must include this explicit, written agreement from
the lending institution in the proposal package. (This provision is not required if the loan is secured by
means other than the land to be acquired or if the Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant will retire the entire
debt.)
4) Statement of Threat
Applicants must include a statement that demonstrates the nature, extent, and level of severity of the
threat(s) to the battlefield. Explain how and to what extent the proposed acquisition addresses and
mitigates the described threat(s). In cases of minimal threats, provide a compelling reason for why the
acquisition of the property at this time is the most appropriate preservation strategy for the battlefield.
5) Battlefield and Parcel Map
Applicants must document that the proposed acquisition lies within the battlefield’s CWSAC “core” and/or
“study” area. Include a USGS 1:24,000 scale, 7.5 minute topographic map (or similar) marked with the
boundaries of the battlefield’s “core” and “study” areas and marked with the boundary of the parcel(s) to
be acquired. Contact the ABPP to confirm “core” and “study” area boundaries. Applicants may submit a
GIS shapefile of the parcel boundary instead of a paper map. If submitting GIS data, applicants must
ensure that the parcel shapefile includes Federal Geographic Data Committee compliant metadata and
can be read with ESRI ArcGIS 9.
6) Willing Seller
Applicants must demonstrate in writing that the owner of the property to be acquired is willing to sell or
donate the land at an agreed-upon price. Acceptable documentation includes a signed contract or
contingent contract to buy the land, or a signed letter from the owner indicating willingness to enter into
such a contract at a specified price.
7) Government Sponsor/Grantee
Non-profit applicants must include a letter from the State or local government sponsor indicating its
agreement to receive and administer the Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant for the proposed acquisition.
8) Agreement to Hold Easement
In cases where the State will not take ownership of the land to be acquired, applicants must include a
letter from the appropriate State Historic Preservation office (or other government agency acceptable to
the NPS) indicating its agreement to hold the required preservation easement in perpetuity.
9) Schedule for Acquisition
Applicants must include a schedule for completion of the acquisition, noting final tasks and closing date.
* AN APPLICATION PACKAGE IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS IT MEETS ALL OF THE APPLICATION
PACKAGE REQUIRED ELEMENTS (SEE ABOVE)*
Application Deadlines
Applicants may submit their proposals to the NPS at any time. The NPS will review all complete
application packages as they are received. The NPS will notify applicants for projects at Priority I and II
battlefields of its decision within 30 days of receipt of a complete application package. The NPS will
notify applicants for projects at Priority III and IV battlefields of its decision after it considers pending
Priority I and II application packages but no later than 120 days after receipt of a complete application
package. If an applicant at a Priority III or IV battlefield gives a compelling reason to expedite a decision
on an application package, the NPS may agree to do so.
Where to Send Applications
Via Commercial Overnight Service
or Courier Service
Kristen McMasters
National Park Service
1201 Eye Street, NW - 2255
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 354-2037
Via U.S. Postal Service (Including Priority
and Express Mail)*
Kristen McMasters
American Battlefield Protection Program
National Park Service
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, NW - 2255
Washington, DC 20240-0001
*Note: U.S. Postal Service mail will be irradiated as a precaution before it is delivered. The irradiation
process can cause significant delays in delivery. It will also damage materials such as photographs.
Contacting the ABPP
Please address questions and requests to Kristen McMasters, American Battlefield Protection Program,
at 202-354-2037, [email protected] or Elizabeth Ries American Battlefield Protection Program
at 202-354-2215, [email protected]
Cover Sheet (this page must be filled out, signed, and included with the grant application
package or the application package will be considered incomplete)*
Applicant:
Government Sponsor:
Date:
Battlefield:
CWSAC Priority Number (1993):
Property to be Purchased:
Tax Parcel(s):
County/City:
Total Acreage:
State:
Type of Purchase:  In Fee Simple
 Easement
Organization/Govt. Agency to Own Property In Fee Simple:
Govt. Agency to Hold Conservation Easement:
Total LWCF/CWBLAG Requested Amount:
Total Matching Funds:
Total Purchase Price:
Check each box below to signify that the item is included in the grant proposal.
 Signed and completed SF424
 Letter that 1) certifies accuracy of application information, 2) acknowledges 6(f)(3), and 3) discloses
sources of non-Federal matching funds
Also, if applicable:
 Third party letter(s) verifying matching fund contribution
 Potential funding sources letters guaranteeing that receipt of a Battlefield Land Acquisition
Grant will release matching funds
 Plan for raising necessary matching funds in a timely manner, if funds not yet secured
 identifies potential funding sources
 includes proposed schedule for securing or commitments of funds.
 Lending institution agreement to subordinate interest in property (if loan secured by land to be
acquired)
 Statement of threat
 USGS 1:24,000 scale, 7.5 min topographic map showing battlefield boundaries and parcel boundaries
 and/or GIS shapefile of parcel boundaries with FGDC compliant metadata
 Documentation of owner willingness to sell at a specific, agreed-upon price. Either a
 signed contract or contigent contract to buy land or a
 signed letter from owner indicating willingness to enter into contract at a specified price.
 Letter from State or local government agreeing to sponsor and administer the grant
 Letter from State Historic Preservation Office or other approved government agency agreeing to hold
easement in perpetuity (if applicable)
 Schedule for completion of acquisition including,
 final tasks
 closing date
Signature of Authorizing Official (Applicant)
Date
*The ABPP will not act on incomplete grant application packages. Application reviews (both 30-day and 120-day
determinations) will begin only after the ABPP receives a complete grant application package with an original signature of an
authorizing official within the applicant’s organization (see pages 5-6 above for more information).
Land and Water Conservation Fund/Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants
Grantee Responsibilities Check List
Grant Agreement
If the ABPP (the grantor) awards a Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grant, the receiving
agency (the grantee) will be required to complete several tasks. These tasks will be outlined in the
final grant agreement.
Required Documentation
The grantee must submit the following documentation to the ABPP for review and approval.
 Signed real estate contract
 Completed appraisal made in conformance with the standards and practices of the Uniform
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (UASFLA), as codified in 49 CFR
24.103, and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practices (USPAP
Standards 1 and 2)
 Draft conservation easement
 Draft letter of agreement from State (if conservation easement is not applicable)
Once the ABPP has approved the above documentation, the ABPP will release the grant funds not
sooner than 15 days prior to closing on the property. The ABPP will not release grant funds
until all of the above documentation has been approved.
Within 45 days of the land acquisition closing date the grantee must provide the ABPP with the
following documentation:
 Copies of property deed and any documents attached to the deed demonstrating that the
Section 6(f)(3) provision and conservation easement (if applicable) have been recorded in the
land records
 Copy of executed and recorded easement (if applicable) as pre-approved by the ABPP
 Easement includes LWCF and 6(f)(3) acknowledgement
 Easement includes public access stipulations
 Final letter of agreement from State if conservation easement is not applicable
 Records that demonstrate in what manner and to what extent the public has access to the
protected property
Once these documents are approved by the ABPP, the grant is complete.
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
APPENDIX 2
NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS
146
138
National Heritage Areas
National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Heritage Areas 101
PLACE-BASED, COMMUNITY-DRIVEN
CONSERVATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
What are NHAs?
National Heritage Areas (NHAs) are
designated by Congress as places where
natural, cultural, and historic resources
combine to form a cohesive, nationally
important landscape. Through their
resources, NHAs tell nationally important
stories that celebrate our nation’s diverse
heritage. NHAs are lived-in landscapes.
Consequently, NHA entities collaborate
with communities to determine how to
make heritage relevant to local interests
and needs.
NHAs are a grassroots, community-driven
approach to heritage conservation and
Paddlers on the Schuylkill River outside Philadelphia, PA. Schuylkill River National Heritage Area coordinates
economic development. Through publicthe annual Schuylkill River Soujourn - a 7-day, 112 mile guided canoe and kayak trip, which provides a wealth of
private partnerships, NHA entities support
learning opportunities for participants. D. Creighton Photo.
historic preservation, natural resource
conservation, recreation, heritage tourism,
 Education and Stewardship – NHAs
and educational projects. Leveraging funds
connect communities to natural, historic,
and long-term support for projects, NHA
and cultural sites through educational
partnerships foster pride of place and an
activities, which promote awareness and
enduring stewardship ethic.
NHA Facts
foster interest in and stewardship of
Forty-nine NHAs have been designated
heritage resources.
Benefits of NHAs
Some of the long-term benefits of NHA
activities include:

Sustainable economic development –
NHAs leverage federal funds (NHAs
average $5.50 for every $1.00 of federal
investment) to create jobs, generate
revenue for local governments, and
sustain local communities through
revitalization and heritage tourism.
 Healthy environment and people –
Many NHAs improve water and air
quality in their regions through
restoration projects, and encourage
people to enjoy natural and cultural sites
by providing new recreational
opportunities.

Improved Quality of Life –Through
new or improved amenities, unique
settings, and educational and volunteer
opportunities, NHAs improve local
quality of life.

Community Engagement and Pride –
By engaging community members in
heritage conservation activities, NHAs
strengthen sense of place and community
pride.
The NHA Program
NHAs further the mission of the National
Park Service (NPS) by fostering community
stewardship of our nation’s heritage. The
NHA program, which currently includes 49
heritage areas, is administered by NPS
coordinators in Washington DC and seven
regional offices - Anchorage, Seattle, San
Francisco, Denver, Omaha, Philadelphia and
Atlanta - as well as park unit staff.
NHAs are not national park units. Rather,
NPS partners with, provides technical
assistance, and distributes matching federal
funds from Congress to NHA entities. NPS
does not assume ownership of land inside
heritage areas or impose land use controls.
by Congress since 1984. Each NHA is
created through individual federal law.
NHA designation recognizes the national
importance of a region’s sites and history.
Through annual Congressional appropriations,
NPS passes funds to NHA entities. Although
most entities are authorized to receive up to
$1 millon annually over a set period of time,
actual annual appropriations range from
$150,000 – $750,000.
The financial assistance component of the
program is secured with legal agreements,
accountability measures, and performance
requirements for NHA entities.
NHA designation does not affect private
property rights.
The National Heritage Areas
Students collecting water quality samples along the
Quinebaug River as part of the Volunteer Water
Quality Monitoring Program administered by
Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National
Heritage Corridor.
ALABAMA – Muscle Shoals National Heritage
Area
NEW JERSEY – Crossroads of the American
Revolution National Heritage Area
ALASKA – Kenai Mountains-Turnagain Arm
National Heritage Area
NEW HAMPSHIRE –*Freedom's Way National
Heritage Area (MA, NH)
ARIZONA – Yuma Crossing National Heritage
Area
NEW MEXICO – Northern Rio Grande National
Heritage Area
COLORADO – Cache La Poudre River
Corridor  Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area  South Park National Heritage Area
NEW YORK – *Champlain Valley National
Heritage Partnership (NY, VT)  Erie Canalway
National Heritage Corridor  Hudson River
Valley National Heritage Area  Niagara Falls
National Heritage Area
CONNECTICUT – *Quinebaug and Shetucket
Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor (CT,
MA)  *Upper Housatonic Valley National
Heritage Area (CT, MA)
FLORIDA – *Gullah/Geechee Cultural
Heritage Corridor (FL, GA, NC, SC)
GEORGIA – Arabia Mountain National
Heritage Area  Augusta Canal National
Heritage Area  *Gullah/Geechee Cultural
Heritage Corridor (FL, GA, NC, SC)
IOWA – Silos and Smokestacks National
Heritage Area
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area mobilized
community members to raise funds needed to
operate and maintain two Arizona state parks,
including the Yuma Territorial Prison State Park
(pictured here).
ILLINOIS – Abraham Lincoln National
Heritage Area  Illinois & Michigan Canal
National Heritage Corridor
KANSAS – * Freedom's Frontier National
Heritage Area (KS, MO)
LOUISIANA – Atchafalaya National Heritage
Area  Cane River National Heritage Area
MARYLAND – Baltimore National Heritage
Area  *Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area (MD, PA, VA, WV)
Skipper Russell, Seasonal Produce Farms, NC. Blue
Ridge National Heritage Area provided funds to the
Appalachian Sustainable Agriculture Project (ASAP),
which links new farms to available land and stimulates
farm tourism. ASAP photo.
MASSACHUSETTS – Essex National
Heritage Area  *Freedom's Way National
Heritage Area (MA, NH)  *John H. Chafee
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage
Corridor (MA, RI)  *Quinebaug and
Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage
Corridor (CT, MA)  *Upper Housatonic
Valley National Heritage Area (CT, MA)
MICHIGAN – MotorCities National Heritage
Area
MISSISSIPPI – Mississippi Delta National
Heritage Area  Mississippi Gulf Coast
National Heritage Area  Mississippi Hills
National Heritage Area
National Heritage Area Program Office
1201 “Eye” Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
202.354.2222
For more information visit
www.nps.gov/history/heritageareas
MISSOURI – * Freedom's Frontier National
Heritage Area (KS, MO)
NEVADA – *Great Basin National Heritage
Area (NV, UT)
NORTH CAROLINA – Blue Ridge National
Heritage Area  *Gullah/Geechee Cultural
Heritage Corridor (FL, GA, NC, SC)
NORTH DAKOTA – Northern Plains National
Heritage Area
OHIO – Ohio & Erie National Heritage
Canalway  National Aviation Heritage Area
PENNSYLVANIA – Delaware & Lehigh National
Heritage Corridor  *Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area (MD, PA, VA,
WV)  Lackawanna Heritage Valley  Oil Region
National Heritage Area  Rivers of Steel National
Heritage Area  Schuylkill River National
Heritage Area  Path of Progress National
Heritage Route
RHODE ISLAND – *John H. Chafee Blackstone
River Valley National Heritage Corridor (MA,
RI)
SOUTH CAROLINA – *Gullah/Geechee
Cultural Heritage Corridor (FL, GA, NC, SC) 
South Carolina National Heritage Corridor
TENNESSEE – Tennessee Civil War National
Heritage Area
UTAH – *Great Basin National Heritage Area
(NV, UT)  Mormon Pioneer National Heritage
Area
VERMONT – * Champlain Valley National
Heritage Partnership (VT, NY)
VIRGINIA – *Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area (MD, PA, VA,
WV)  Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National
Historic District
WEST VIRGINIA – *Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area (MD, PA, VA,
WV)  Wheeling National Heritage Area 
National Coal Heritage Area
*Denotes NHA that spans multiple states.
April 2012
DRAFT Jenkins’ Ferry Battlefield Preservation Plan DRAFT
APPENDIX 3
RESOURCES FOR
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
148
139
SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR STATE AND LOCAL HISTORY
http://www.aaslh.org
American Battlefield Preservation Program
http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp/
Arkansas Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission
http://www.arkansascivilwar150.com/
Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism
http://www.arkansas.com/
Arkansas Historic Preservation Program
http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/
Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department –
Recreational Trails Program
http://www.arkansashighways.com/recreational_trails.aspx
Blue & Gray Magazine
http://www.bluegraymagazine.com/
Civic Tourism
http://civictourism.org/
Civil War News
http://www.civilwarnews.com/
Civil War Trust
http://www.civilwar.org
Cultural Heritage Tourism
http://www.culturalheritagetourism.org/
Historic Preservation Foundation of Arkansas
http://preservearkansas.org/
National Association for Interpretation
http://www.interpnet.com
National Council for the Social Studies
http://www.socialstudies.org/
National History Day, Inc
http://www.nationalhistoryday.org
National Trust for Historic Preservation
http://www.preservationnation.org/
Teaching with Historic Places
http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/twhp
USDA Rural Information Center – Historic Preservation Resources
http://www.nal.usda.gov/ric/ricpubs/preserve.html
Walton Family Foundation
http://www.waltonfamilyfoundation.org/