The Free Press, Mankato, MN

Local News

Related Photos

  • Plans for the original commissary building and nearby 1862 battle site at historic Fort Ridgely State Park have raised the hackles of park preservationists. Submitted photo

    Fort2

  • An artist’s rendering depicts a Dakota attack on Fort Ridgely in 1862. A military garrison and civilians held the fort against 800 warriors. Submitted photo

    Fort1

  • FortMap

    FortMap

June 24, 2010

New fight at Fort Ridgely involves park reconfiguration

Workable concept for all being sought

By Brian Ojanpa Free Press Staff Writer

NEW ULM — As a Fort Ridgely State Park brouhaha continues to simmer, all parties concerned are hopeful an acceptable solution can be worked out.

“It’s been pretty controversial and we’re struggling to come up with a design” amenable to all, New Ulm Department of Natural Resources park supervisor Jeff Sieve said of a proposal to reconfigure the entrance to the historic site.

John Fritsche, who heads the Friends of Fort Ridgely volunteer group, said state entities erred by not including Friends members early on in the planning stages.

“Now they’re going to some damage control to see what they can do. It’s a volatile situation,” Fritsche said.

At issue is a plan to move DNR park offices from the entrance of the park into a historic commissary building about a half-mile into the site of settler/Indian battles in 1862.

The DNR and Minnesota Historical Society say the move would improve park efficiencies by creating more parking and enabling the museum portion of the site to be open year-round.

But the thought of motor homes and other vehicles parking on a site where ancestral blood was shed rankles many.

John LaBatte of New Ulm, who had both Dakota Indian and white forebears involved in the battles, said the area is sacred.

“They should not be putting a parking lot anywhere on those grounds. This isn’t right that they’re doing this.”

The dispute initially flared last month, when word was received about the proposal being backed by an $800,000 state bonding bill approved by the Legislature last winter.

Rep. Terry Morrow, DFL-St. Peter, said legislators were unaware of the plan’s details and the rancor it would arouse.

Morrow said the DNR and Minnesota Historical Society went forward too quickly without input from the Friends group, which has extensively fundraised to keep the park operating.

The DNR’s Sieve admits that the Friends group should have been in the loop from the outset and said the DNR was stunned by the immediate negative reaction the project received.

In a meeting earlier this week with Friends members, Sieve apologized on behalf of the DNR for the way the matter was handled.

John Crippen, director of historic sites for the Minnesota Historical Society, also has sounded a conciliatory note, stating that further discussions will be held to arrive at a workable concept for all.

That said, he also remains a proponent of plans to move the “contact station” deeper inside the park, which would not only help preserve the fort’s commissary building but would help attract more visitors.

Fritsche said he also wants to remain conciliatory, though when it comes to turning part of a revered battle site into a parking lot, he draws a line in the sand.

“I wouldn’t set a Wal-Mart in the middle of Gettysburg Park, and that’s sort of the same thing that’s going on here.”

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Local News