Park Service releases finding on demos of historic structures in New River Gorge

GLEN JEAN, W.Va. — The National Park Service has announced a decision and the release of a "finding of no significant impact" for the proposed demolition of historic structures in the New River Gorge National Park and Preserve in West Virginia.

The proposal has drawn the ire of state lawmakers and some West Virginians, many of whom felt that the state would be better served by an alternative plan that would preserve many of the structures. The park service is now proposing to keep those that have a high potential for reuse.

The new release of the findings follows a comprehensive evaluation of a proposal to demolish deteriorated structures that are a financial burden to maintain in a manner that ensures public safety and are not considered necessary to achieve the park’s mission.

The finding is available for viewing on the park service's planning website, according to a press release provided by Eve West, Chief of Interpretation and Education for the park, the nearby Bluestone National Scenic River, and the Gauley River National Recreation Area.

The park service considered three options in the assessment, according to the release, including:

• Alternative A: No Action.
• Alternative B: Demolish All Proposed Excess Historic Structures.
• Alternative C: Retain Proposed Excess Historic Structures with High Potential for Reuse

In response to public comments, the park selected Alternative C with minor modifications as the preferred alternative, based on a variety of factors, including public input, the project's purpose and need, environmental, economic, and technical considerations, potential for reuse, and opportunities for enhanced interpretation.

New River Gorge structures to be maintained

The three structures to be retained include the Dun Glen Ark, the Marilyn Brown house, and the Thurmond Ice House. Additionally, as a result of public input, the park may consider leasing three of the structures: the Tom Kelly House in Thurmond, and the Mini-Ark and Boat Storage Rack in the Dun Glen area, should a viable proposal be submitted to the park.

Additional information and a list of structures in the New River Gorge slated for demolition can be found in the report.

Impacts related to the removal of these structures from the park have been assessed through compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.

The finding, signed by the acting regional director on July 18, 2025, outlines the National Park Service's final decision and authorizes the implementation of the selected actions.

Funding for this project is from the Great American Outdoors Act. The act is part of a concerted effort to address the extensive maintenance backlog in national parks.

Supported by revenue from energy development, the fund provides the park service with up to $1.3 billion per year for five years to make significant enhancements in national parks, ensuring their preservation and providing opportunities for recreation, education, and enjoyment for current and future visitors.

Response from state preservationists

Architects, designers, and members of the preservation trades were among the strongest advocates for maintaining the buildings, gathering largely under the banner of the Preservation Alliance of West Virginia.

Alliance Director Danielle Parker said she and the organization's members were, for the most part, pleased with the decision.

"The Preservation Alliance of West Virginia is encouraged by the National Park Service’s decision to compromise on the proposed demolitions by retaining and offering leasing opportunities for several historic properties," Parker said.

"While we remain disappointed that the Prince Brothers Store and Dun Glen Hotel site were not included in the leasing pool, this outcome represents a meaningful win for public advocacy and historic preservation. The door is now open to save and restore more irreplaceable sites for future generations.

"We are grateful for this progress and are now focusing our efforts on understanding the leasing process to support the public in developing strong proposals for the rehabilitation and reuse of these important buildings."

Proposed New River Gorge demolitions stirred debate

The park service came under fire in 2024 when it unveiled a controversial proposal to remove up to 35 deteriorating structures, including several in the Thurmond National Historic District, a chief destination for tourists in the New River Gorge.

The plan targeted 21 historic buildings in the historic town and surrounding parklands. Some park officials argued that the demolitions would reduce maintenance costs, minimize safety hazards, and allow investment in more iconic park features.

According to the park service, the demolition plan would potentially include 19 buildings considered historic or eligible for National Register listing, plus one modern addition, among them:

• Prince Brothers’ General Store
• Dun Glen Ark, Mini-Ark & Boat Storage Rack
• Marilyn Brown House
• Thurmond Ice House
• Vallandingham House Addition
• Brookside Pool Chemical Treatment Building

The Brookside site and the Vallandingham House addition lie outside Thurmond, while most other structures are concentrated within the historic Thurmond district.

Rationale behind New River Gorge demolitions

Park officials say many structures were never intended for reuse and now sit abandoned, overgrown, vandalized, and unsafe. The proposed removal is expected to eliminate approximately $800,000 in annual maintenance and law enforcement costs, allowing the park service to focus its resources on preserving other New River Gorge historic sites and visitor facilities.

West emphasized in an interview with the local news source Lootpress: “We are in the business of saving history, not tearing it down—but you cannot save everything.” She explained that ruins will remain plotted via foundations and enhanced by wayside exhibits or potential augmented‑reality apps to preserve stories virtually.

Community response and public meetings

Public engagement had been robust. Two open houses—in December 2022 and January 2024—saw high turnout at park headquarters in Glen Jean, where park representatives detailed the environmental assessment and gathered feedback. A second formal hearing in Oak Hill in October extended the dialogue following the public comment period.

Approximately 100 public comments were received. Many were substantive, raising questions about alternatives, preservation opportunities, or recommending adaptive reuse instead of demolition.

Local residents and coal‑railroad history enthusiasts voiced concern. Delegate Elliott Pritt (R‑Fayette) described the demolitions of nationally historic landmarks as “unconscionable,” urging constituents to contact West Virginia’s congressional delegation and halt the plan until federal funding support can preserve the structures.

Members of the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks—representing thousands of years of park experience—submitted formal comments criticizing the loss of 21 heritage buildings i the New River Gorge and calling for a thorough evaluation of alternatives.

Historic context and cultural significance

Thurmond was once a vital hub for the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway, bustling with freight revenue and coal activity. Despite its small size today, the New River Gorge town retains critical rail‑era structures that illustrate Appalachian industrial heritage. Other sites in the park—such as Kay Moor and Nuttallburg—offer similarly rich artifacts of railroad, mining, and coal town history, though none are as easily accessible.

Proponents of demolition argue that these targeted structures have lost their historical integrity due to decay and vandalism, sometimes failing even to convey their original stories. The suggestion is to preserve fewer, but more meaningful, structures while removing those that are unsafe.

Balancing preservation and practicality

The New River Gorge demolitions proposal raises fundamental questions: how much history can be saved given limited budgets? Is adaptive reuse viable for dilapidated structures? Can virtual interpretation truly serve visitors?

While the park service insists that preservation of the most significant elements remains core to the site’s mission, opponents argue that demolishing tangible historic resources erodes community identity and diminishes tourism and educational potential.