I understand that this state does not always a good job of funding and caring for parks and historic sites, but I am not sure that this is a good idea. In fact, I think it is a bad one, with potential to be awful or terrible, whichever adjective is worse. How can we know if the private groups - in this case a church - can or will do any better? Will such groups even care about history or will they just look to turn such gifts into profit?
It is bad enough that this has happened to a site where Daniel Boone, one of the most famous names in Kentucky history, lived. What happens to sites without such a well-known name attached to them? As a person who loves the Civil War, I wonder what will happen to small Civil War sites around the state? This is a bigger issue than “just” Civil,War sites, but I admit that was my first thought when I saw this story, even though I appreciate all history. I admittedly am writing this story to fit in with this blog’s purpose.
What site will be next? There are rumors about White Hall State Historic Site, Home of anti-slavery politician Cassius Marcellus Clay, being given to Eastern Kentucky University, though that is not official, at least yet. Official or not, it is still concerning given what has already happened.
Not sure how I feel on this...at times, privatization actually helps a site as often a private entity does a more effective job in managing and cutting costs...see Fort Ancient in Ohio as an example. The state still owns the property, but another entity manages the site, and the amount of events and what not they have been able to pull off has increased several fold. The concern for me is when the state would turn over the ownership portion without haven't some sort of oversight on what happens to the property.ReplyDelete