Georgia currently has the following federally-protected areas:
- 1 National Forest (Chattahoochee-Oconee)
- 6 national historic parks, historic sites and/or military parks (Andersonville, Jimmy Carter, MLK, Kennesaw Mountain, Chickamauga-Chattanooga, and Ocmulgee Mounds)
- 2 national monuments (Fort Frederica and Fort Pulaski)
- 10 national wildlife refuges
- 5 national natural landmarks
- 12 federal wilderness areas
- 1 wild and scenic river
- 2 national trails
- 1 national recreation area
- 1 national seashore
- 1 national marine sanctuary
- 1 national estuarine research reserve
But apparently Georgia does not have any “national parks”. Also, most of the national forests are located north of Macon and the Black Belt.
Last year, the National Park Service commenced a study to estimate the feasibility of expanding the Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park as a full-on national park and preserve. This study also estimated the feasibility of expanding the protected area down the Ocmulgee River to south of Robins AFB. The study, which was completed and sent to Congress this week, ultimately estimated that both would be unfeasible due to cost and landowner opposition, but, in the interest of providing some form of protection for the river, recommended designating a smaller area as a National Heritage Area, a form of public-private partnership in which the NPS plays an advisory role while most of the work is carried out by a government or non-profit organization.
The group which advocates for this expansion has a website. And the congressional cohort which supports this initiative – Sens. Ossoff (D) and Warnock (D), Reps. Bishop (D) and Scott (R) – are not accepting the NPS study and are seeking for approval of the park in Congress. And if that doesn’t work, there’s always presidential designation as a national monument via the Antiquities Act, which could overrule opposition from local landowners and the Georgia Department of Natural Resources.
Political implications of national parks
Ever since first coming across research regarding how Democratic candidates for president (with the exception of Hillary Clinton in 2016) have done very well in rural counties whose economies depended on ecotourism, I have become deeply interested in how “new rural economies” which draw population have different economic outcomes and political interests than counties in “old rural economies” which depend on agriculture, livestock and/or mining. This held true for Joe Biden in 2020 as well, going so far as winning Teton County, Wyoming, the location of Grand Teton National Park and the most Democratic county in the deep-red state.
Granted, this doesn’t exactly seem to apply to ex-Confederate states, with several national parks and national forests in the Appalachians (i.e., Tennessee, North Carolina) not translating to rural gains for Democrats in presidential elections, or at least not drawing many transplants residents from outside of the region. But it somehow seems to work elsewhere in the United States.
National Heritage Area?
As stated, a National Heritage Area (NHA) affords fewer protections and restrictions on development, but can cover larger areas. An example is the new Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area, which spans 19 counties and their cities in Alabama’s Black Belt region, is one of two NHAs in Alabama and is administered by the University of West Alabama (based in Livingston).
The NHA system, compared to the national park system, is very new, with NHAs first being designated in the 80s under Reagan and the NHA system only being established in January this year through the National Heritage Area Act (which also established the Alabama Black Belt NHA).
- What tourism can NHAs draw compared to national parks?
- Why are there so many more NHAs located east of the Mississippi than west?
- Conversely, why are these so few national parks east of the Mississippi compared to west?
At the very least, NHAs seem to be easier to establish in the eastern U.S. because they don’t seem to require strict preservation of historic or natural properties, which works just fine for a much more densely populated and farmed region like the eastern U.S. Apparently, NHAs can even overlap each other (odd).
We need a park and preserve
IMO, Georgia needs a park and preserve which extends south of Macon:
- the Southern half of the state is absent of any national parks, national preserves or national forests;
- Dependence on mass agriculture is a population loser;
- Federal protection of land would be a massive method of economic diversification
- the Black Belt, which also forms a concentration of African-American majority counties stretching from Louisiana to South Carolina, does not have enough natural preservation and ecotourism going on;
- The colleges and universities in the Macon-Warner Robins area (Middle Georgia State, Mercer, Wesleyan, Fort Valley State) would benefit from this as well.
If an Ocmulgee National Park and Preserve extending to south of Warner Robins is the way to make this diversification happen, then so be it. A National Heritage Area can be secondarily added to the surrounding area, but the park and preserve should also become a reality.