The Elkmont Controversy

By: Jason Bryant, Tony Griffith, Erin Mitchell, Taitum Godfrey,Tiffany Sanger , The lovely Mrs. Davidson

The purpose of the Elkmont trip was to observe the cabins and gain information of the living times in the 1920’s. Also we sought information about the controversy over the existing settlements.

It was built in about 1919, the lumber for making the houses was purchased by the Little River Lumber Company.

In the 1930’s the park was acquiring land for the park. They offered a lesser cash settlement or a lifetime lease to the settlement owners. The choosers of the lifetime lease had there children sing the lease so the lease would be extended for their kids families.

In 1952 settlement owners made an agreement with the Secretary of Interior to give up their leases in 1972 if they could have electricity.

• When 1972 came around Elkmont Preservation Committee negotiated with the federal government for a lease extension. The leases were extended until 1992. When there was a death the lease was void.

On December 31,1992 Elkmont Preservation Committees lease for the hotel and all but three cabins expired and the occupants were required to leave.

The three cabins that were left did not belong to the preservation committee. There leases expired either upon their death or on December 31,2001. Two of these are still occupied.

The controversy of Elkmont is whether or not to tear down the buildings or not.

Choices

~ To leave three standing

~ To tear them all down

~ Leave them all

InputWhat we have to say !

Mr. Binder~ He thinks that they should renovate the old hotel so that people that don’t like to camp can still come to the Smokey’s and have some where to stay. Providing this for them would prevent them from going to Gatlinburg.

Charlie~ We are the only country who considers a 50 year old building a monument. This was only rich peoples summer homes. He feels that permenent residency homes should be kept but that a lot of the homes are shacks and the roofs are caving in.

Jason~ Elmont is an area of vast nature and beauty. The homes in this area have not had any affect on the area or its surroundings. People want to tear down these homes and give it “back to nature.” If the people do indeed get their way and tear down the homes it may have the opposite affect of what they would want. The nature has built around the homes and has survived fine. It would be irresponsible to tear down the homes and disrupt nature’s adapted course.

The rest of the groups input~ The reason we think they don’t want us to see the buildings is because they don’t want more people to support the historical preservation. We think that moving the establishments would demean their value. We also feel that the permanent residence homes are more important than the summer homes that were owned by the rich. Taitum said, “It doesn’t seem like they are harming the environment.”

Obituary of Elkmont House.To the residence of Elkmont, Tennessee. The death of

the Lem Ownby house occurred on December 31, 1992.

Date of birth: June 3, 1919Date of Death: December 31,1992Cause of death: Deteriation from old age.Survivors: Tennessee State Historic Preservation

Committee, and the Elkmont Preservation Committee, the Sierra Club, the Izaak Walton League, former Park residents and their descendents.

Funeral Arrangements

• Rehab the Appalachian Clubhouse for a community/meeting facility

• Rehab one or two cabins and place exhibits detailing the history of Elkmont, logging, tourism

• Stabilize the interiors and rehab the exteriors of the remainding houses