Collateral Values

Old forts, New amenities in the Southern Plains

Fort Washita, Oklahoma, 1842-1865.

The Southern Plains of the United States (U.S.), specifically the states of Texas and Oklahoma, is a region of transition. Physically, it represents the transition from the humid, forested eastern U.S. with mostly perennial water resources to the dry western U.S. with grasslands, deserts, and mostly ephemeral water resources. Socioeconomically, it represents the transition from the densely populated East to the wild open spaces of the West. Historically and culturally, it represents the transition from the French/English colonies of the eastern half of the nation to the Spanish territory of the Southwest. Later, it would represent the transition from the eastern pre-Civil War states to the western post-Civil War states. The Southern Plains also represent a transition in time when American settlers were moving into western Native American lands. This occupation led to many intense battles between the European/American settlers and various Tribal Nations. Between 1821 and 1890, many forts were built in response to these conflicts and also to promote new settlements. Of these, 33 have been protected as public places, including museums, state parks, national historic sites, city parks, resorts, and schools. This post discusses the historical, cultural, and natural values of these ‘protected forts’ within the context of ecosystem services that have evolved from these sites.

Forts from the Southern Plains Indian Wars that have been commemorated, protected, and open to the public in present-day Oklahoma and Texas. The number on the fort corresponds to its alphabetical Fort ID in Table 4.3 of my book chapter.

During the American Indian Wars which occurred over hundreds of years from colonial times till the early 1900s, some of the most widespread fighting and deadliest battles occurred in the Southern Plains. The recognized start of the Southern Plains Indian Wars was Mexico’s independence in 1821. The new Mexican Republic welcomed and incentivized American traders and settlers, largely to create a buffer between the core of Mexico and its nemesis the Comanches. During this period, several important trade and settlement routes were established and fortified. Around the same time, numerous tribes were relocated to the Indian Territory of what is now Oklahoma, with a surge following the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Several military forts were established around this new ‘Permanent Indian Frontier’ to protect the boundary with white settlements, protect the ‘Civilized Tribes’ from the ‘hostile’ Plains Indians, police the territory, and enforce U.S. laws and policies. Forts Gibson, Towson, and Washita were some of these foundational forts.

The movement of both whites and new Indian tribes into the Southern Plains was an invasion into Comancheria, the empire established by the Comanches during the 18^th century. This act was met with widespread and brutal attacks on white settlers and travelers, and retaliatory attacks on the Comanches. After Texas became a U.S. state in 1846, dozens of forts were built with federal funding to defend against the Comanches and encourage regional development. The Southern Plains forts were important for national priorities as well. In 1848, the acquisition of the southwestern U.S. from Spain and the subsequent discovery of gold in California created the need for increased federal defense for westward emigrants. Following the Civil War, the U.S. government reoccupied some of the old forts, created several new forts, and invested a lot of money and resources in these forts. Many of the Southern Plains forts, post-Civil War, became posts for the ‘Buffalo Soldiers,’ who I will talk more about next week. The Comanche Wars ended in 1875 with the surrender of Quanah Parker. Other tribes and renegades continued to resist until about 1890, coincidentally the same year that the Census Bureau declared the frontier was officially closed.

Following the Southern Plains Indian Wars, a few of the forts continued to be used for military purposes periodically. Fort Reno, for example, was used as a German POW camp during World War II. But with the expansion of settlements and the Southern Pacific Railroad, along with the nation’s shift in focus to global conflicts, the need for forts in this region diminished and almost all of the forts were abandoned by the beginning of the 20^th century.

Fort Phantom Hill, 1851-1854.

After the forts were abandoned, most were stripped or destroyed for building materials. Some, like Forts Concho, Davis, and McKavett, were saved by local citizens moving in to the fort buildings and using them for residence or business. The Texas settlers’ forts (Boggy, Cibolo, Inglish, Leaton, and Parker) remained with the original landowner, but over time fell into disuse and the structures deteriorated. It is important to note that none of the Texas forts were on properties owned by the federal government, but instead were leased from private landowners or the state. The Oklahoma forts, on the other hand, were on federal property. Following their abandonment, most were transferred to their respective Tribal Nations: Fort Towson to the Choctaw, Fort Washita to the Chickasaw, and Fort Gibson to the Cherokee. Of the approximately 73 forts constructed 1821–1890 and used for the Southern Plains Indian Wars, only 33 ended up being commemorated, protected, and open to the public. Over half of these are now historic sites or museums. One, Fort Davis, is a National Historic Site. Five are county or city parks primarily used for local community activities and recreation. Four of the forts are state parks: Boggy, Parker, Richardson, and Sherman (the last named Lake Bob Sandlin State Park). Two of the forts are now schools and two are recreational resorts that offer public programs and educational opportunities. One is a USDA research facility, but also houses the Historic Fort Reno historical site and museum, as well as the U.S. Cavalry Association headquarters and library. Of the 33 forts, only two remain as active military installations, Fort Sill in Oklahoma and Fort Bliss in Texas. I detail how these forts were restored and became protected places in my book chapter,[1] but what I want to focus on here is the new amenities provided by these old forts.

I documented the historical, cultural, and natural benefits by visiting all 33 protected places, touring their facilities, hiking their trails, and meeting with site managers and natural resource specialists. Above is a table that organizes these benefits by type of ecosystem service. By virtue of containing soil and vegetation (and in most cases water), all of the forts provide at least incidental habitat to a number of species. The total protected area of this potential habitat of the 33 forts is 410 square miles, but if you include adjacent protected lands, this habitat range expands to 1,536 square miles. Twenty-eight of the forts have water features with a variety of aquatic habitats. Fort Sill, for example, has approximately 220 lakes/ponds, 452 wetlands, and approximately 500 miles of rivers/streams. Another measure of habitat quality is coverage of native vegetation. Only a few small areas of native prairie remain in the Southern Plains. The protected forts have added to this inventory considerably through native plantings, prescribed fires, exotic/invasive vegetation removal, or grazer control. Fort Cibolo tops the list in this measure of habitat quality, with almost 7,500 acres of restored native prairie. Fort Reno protects more than 3,000 acres of native tallgrass prairie that has never been plowed. Fort Sill maintains several large areas of native prairie, including a 2,400-acre tallgrass prairie preserve. Given that all of these Southern Plains forts are within the Central Flyway, these prairies, lakes, wetlands, streams, and riparian habitats serve millions of migratory birds every year.

Native tallgrass prairie at Fort Reno, 1874-1947. This 3,000-acre prairie is one of the only places in the Southern Plains that has never been plowed.

Millions of people are also served by these protected forts, which provide raw materials, energy, freshwater sources, flood control, climate change mitigation, soil protection, pollination, and improved air and water quality. Additionally, the 33 forts have historical and cultural significance, and all but a few are archaeological landmarks where cultural remains have been protected. Further, two-thirds of the forts have ‘Living History Days’ where they demonstrate cultural and technological aspects of the forts during the mid-1800s. Several forts take advantage of their unique, scenic landscape to host arts, cultural, and scientific activities. Fort Reno (with their 3,000-acre native prairie) and Fort Davis (with their biodiverse mountainous desert terrain) both use their aesthetic landscapes for scientific research and classes in film, photography, botany, technology, and conservation. All of the forts create a sense of place and a connection to their natural landscape. The Rio Grande, for example, is culturally significant, has sacred meaning, and creates a sense of place for multiple cultures. The four forts located along the Rio Grande dedicate resources to promote this identity and spirituality. Fort McIntosh hosts the Dia del Rio festival every October which includes a river art exhibit, kayaking excursions, sustainability workshops, and a ceremony where ministers of multiple faiths bless the river and adjacent trail. A Native American ceremony is also held at this rare, natural crossing of the Rio Grande, where 5,000 years of their history is acknowledged and blessed. The site of Fort Leaton is particularly significant and commemorated with multiple events because it is located along the Camino Real (of Mexico) and at La Junta de los Rios, the confluence of Rio Grande and Rio Conchos. Fort Ringgold, also located on the Rio Grande, has three volcanic ash mounds which were used by prehistoric Native Americans for stone tools and likely religious ceremonies. Created during the same geologic epoch about 30 million years ago is the 140-feet high volcanic plug known as Mount Inge, which was used by prehistoric and modern Native Americans. Mount Inge now serves another ecosystem service, blocking the light pollution from the city of Uvalde so that Fort Inge can still have stargazing events. Several of the forts host Star Parties which help us appreciate dark skies, a phenomena that is becoming increasingly rare in the Southern Plains.

Natural and cultural features at Fort Inge, 1849-1869.

Star-gazing at Fort Griffin, 1867-1881. Photo by Mike Mez.

For many of the forts, cultural activities are combined with recreational opportunities, further enhancing overall wellbeing. The most popular recreational activity on the forts is hiking. Among all the forts, there are 347 miles of nature hiking. Many of these trails are also used for biking, and some for horseback riding. Given the historical and cultural significance of the forts, many fort grounds and trails are used for prominent running and adventure races like the Port to Fort Adventure Race at Fort Gibson. Fort Washita hosts an annual track meet for about 3,000 people. The second most popular recreational activity is fishing, available at 18 of the 33 forts. Seasonal hunting is allowed on five forts: Boggy, Bliss, Cibolo, Clark, and Sill. Boating, swimming, and camping are allowed at many of the sites as well. Among all the forts, there is a recreational activity for practically anyone’s taste, even if it is just leisure walking around the heritage sites.

Nature hiking is a popular recreational activity at many of the forts. At Fort Clark Springs (1852-1946), hikers can explore 17 miles of trails through a mosaic of ecosystems.

Throughout history, places have been protected because of their recognized historical, cultural, or natural values. Preserving these values is important for our wellbeing, whether it is reminiscing over our past, interacting with others who have similar values, or enjoying the benefits of the natural environment. The vast majority of protected places embody one or two of these values. Rarely does a protected place encompass all three. By having historical, cultural, and natural values, the protected forts from the Southern Plains Indian Wars are hidden gems. Historically, these forts represent the beginnings of statehood for both Texas and Oklahoma. They promoted settlement in a hostile environment, while also serving transportation and trade routes. Culturally, forts were and are the meeting place of diverse societies, including settlers from across North America and Europe, the military, and multiple Tribal Nations. Not only are they cultural heritage tourism destinations, but they also serve as sites for a wide range of modern cultural activities. Naturally, these protected places provide precious habitat and ecological functions in two states with relatively little protected land. Historical places such as forts are vital components in our network of protected places, particularly the National Parks. The current Trump administration and a few corrupt congressmen are trying to whitewash this history and remove many of these historical sites from the National Park System. If their evil efforts are successful, the loss of these historical, cultural, and natural values would be devastating. As the environmental historian William Cronon so elegantly conveys: “We come from nature. But we also come from our own past. And so the interpretation of nature and history, together, is not a distraction that the parks face. It is the very core of the enterprise. They’re all about where we come from.”[2]

Fort Davis National Historic Site, 1854-1891.

Sneak Peek of Next Week

There was a section in this week’s post on the Buffalo Soldiers, but I realized that these heroes deserved their own post. So next week’s post will be all about the Buffalo Soldiers with a focus on their importance to conservation.

Word of the Week

This week’s post was taken largely from a chapter I published in a book that was originally titled Battlefield Ecology. But after the editor Todd Lookingbill read my chapter (and maybe others in the collection), he changed the title of the book to Collateral Values, which is this week’s word. As Todd explained to me, this new term is a reverse play on the old concept of collateral damage, which refers to the unintended consequences or negative effects of a military operation. Collateral values, on the other hand, refers to the positive outcomes from military landscapes, some intentional and some unintentional. As I have illustrated above, these collateral values consist of historical, cultural, and natural values, as well as inherent, utilitarian, and relational values. It is important to note that some of these collateral values are the result of collateral damage. Dark periods in history have led to rays of light, but both histories contribute to “the value of knowledge.” Let’s not erase one to make the other look better.

A repugnant attempt by the Trump administration to whitewash our nation’s history.

Song of the Week

Blakely cannon at Fort Gibson, 1824-1890.

How The West Was Lost is a PBS docuseries that explores the Native American experience during the mid to late 1800s, the same period covered in this week’s post. Peter Kater and R. Carlos Nakai co-created the original score for this documentary. Their music, which features the Native American flute and other traditional instruments, is a tribute to Indigenous Peoples and their land. One of their songs on this soundtrack—Landscape of War­—speaks to this week’s theme. This instrumental piece is also fitting because it blends an old Native American style with New Age melodies. Old style, New music.

---

[1] Julian, JP (2019). Old forts and new amenities in the Southern Plains. In Lookingbill T, Smallwood P (Eds.), Collateral Values: The Natural Capital Created by Landscapes of War, Cham, Springer, pp. 77-109 (Chapter 4).

[2] Burns, Ken (2011). The national parks: America’s best idea – Part 6, “the morning of creation” (1946–1980). Washington, DC: Florentine Films.