MAKE YOUR MOCCASIN BEND VOICES HEARD — AGAIN

The public, not surprisingly, is divided as to how the Moccasin Bend National Archeological District of the Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park should be developed.

We are divided on the president nominees for whom we voted in November, the faith to which we adhere, the type of car we prefer to drive and the cereal we eat in the morning, so why should this be different?

For instance, many believed a multiuse trail around the perimeter of the peninsula that is Moccasin Bend was a good idea. But many did not. Many supported self-guided access to Civil War sites in the area, but many believed access should be limited to ranger-guided tours.

On one aspect of the development, though, all of those who provided the National Park Service with comments, mailed-back cards and letters, and correspondence from a variety of nonprofit organizations were unanimous. They believed the 33-acre law enforcement firearms training range on the peninsula — which was promised to the park service a decade ago — should be located outside the park because of its inconsistency with the purpose of the park.

All the comments came a year and a half ago as the park service held two open houses to hear public comment on draft alternatives — which grew out of further public comments in 2009 — for the Moccasin Bend segment of the national military park.

Now, the National Park Service, with the public consultation included, has released its general management plan and environmental assessment of the district, a key step in defining the future experiences of visitors to the area and how the park service will make decisions and manage operations within the district.

On Thursday at Outdoor Chattanooga in Coolidge Park, park officials again will hold an open house — from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. — to share the plan for the district and three alternatives for its future management. Park staff presentations will be offered at 4:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m.

The plan offers three opportunities for development of the district, down from four the public could consider in 2015.

“Alternative A” would continue the current management plan, which would mean little would change and little would be developed. What little recreation is available and what few ranger-led tours are offered would continue. What is currently being preserved would continue to be preserved.

“Alternative B” would offer a visitors center at the district’s Gateway site on Hamm Road. Much of the park service area would fall into cultural protection zones, which would restrict visitor access to those areas but provide occasional on-site programming and ranger-led experiences.

“Alternative C,” the option the National Park Service prefers, would provide a visitors center and more self-guided experiences that would include outdoor interpretive exhibits and cultural programming. Overall, the third option would include slightly more development of the district than the second alternative and slightly less culture protection.

Among the alternatives listed in 2015 but now dismissed is the aforementioned trail around the perimeter of the peninsula, from the Gateway property to the Brown’s Ferry Federal Road property facing Raccoon Mountain. Although to us that seems like one of the most scenically inviting attributes the property could offer, park officials said concerns over the longterm sustainability of the trail, degree of environmental impact to the area, financial cost to build and maintain the trail, and opposition by neighbors and American Indian tribes kept it from being a final consideration.

Another is access to the Gateway site from the Tennessee River. Although there was interest in a public dock, the cost of and environmental impact from what would have to be done at the site did not make the idea feasible.

Once the district’s general management plan is reviewed by the public — through May 30 — the next step is “either a finding of no significant impact or a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.”

Should the management plan, in turn, be approved, that is no guarantee of action. Federal projects of this nature are painfully, glacially slow in development and can be affected by, among other things, budget restrictions, requirements for additional data or compliance, unanticipated environmental factors and priorities of other National Park Service properties.

We would love to think the proper boxes could be checked and ground broken this summer, but the reality is something different.

Indeed, the management plan suggests “full implementation could be many years in the future.” In the meantime, we think relocation of the firearms training range would be a significant step forward.

It certainly would make the planning process easier toward the day when area residents and visitors can delve further into a history that sites people here some 12,000 years ago, finds brother warring against brother in a civil war 150 years ago and offers 750 acres of scenic beauty — including vistas of Chattanooga and Lookout Mountain — today and for years to come.