Some assets are measured by their market value. Others are measured by what they contribute to a community over time. The Southern Woodlands may have an appraised value, but their importance to Mount Gretna cannot be understood in dollars alone.

The Southern Woodlands are part of a larger story—one that began with the early years of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua and continues today...

This summer marks the 135th season of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua.

The Chautauqua began in 1892. In its early years, the organization acquired the land that would become the foundation of the community we know today. For more than a century, portions of that historic landholding have remained under Chautauqua ownership.

The railroad brought people to Mount Gretna.

The woods gave them a reason to stay.

For generations, people have been drawn to this place by a combination of things that are difficult to separate: the Chautauqua experience, the forested setting, the cottages, the culture, the traditions, the sense of community, and the feeling of being surrounded by nature. The people created the Pennsylvania Chautauqua, but the landscape sustains it.

Today, we are being asked to consider the future of the Southern Woodlands. While much of the discussion has focused on approximately 15 acres of woodland, I believe the larger question is this:

What responsibility comes with inheriting land that has helped shape the community we know today?

If this land is simply a real estate asset, then selling a portion of it for conservation may seem like a logical choice.

If, however, this land is part of a larger inheritance—one that connects nature, learning, recreation, culture, and community—then ownership becomes part of the conversation.

The Southern Woodlands are not simply an undeveloped tract of land. They are part of the original Coleman tract that became the Pennsylvania Chautauqua.

They are also connected to one of the community's most essential resources: water. The southern ridge has been connected to the Chautauqua's water supply since its earliest years. While the well, reservoir, and related infrastructure on this parcel are protected through a separate deed and easements, the surrounding woodlands are part of the recharge area that helps sustain those water resources. Forested land above an aquifer filters precipitation, stabilizes the ground, and protects the groundwater below — functions that extend well beyond the footprint of any individual well, reservoir, or easement.

These functions depend on keeping the forest canopy intact. Adjacent State Game Land 145, where 53 acres were clear-cut in 2008-2009, has shown what happens when canopy is removed: increased runoff onto downslope properties. The relationship between this land and the Chautauqua's water system is not merely historical; it's current.

For more than 130 years, generations of Chautauquaians have carried responsibility for this land. Leadership has changed. Priorities have changed. The community has changed. Yet the remaining communal lands from the original Coleman tract have remained part of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua.

Throughout that history, portions of the original landholding were developed into the community we know today. Cottage lots were created. Homes were built. Roads were extended. Yet the remaining communal lands continued to provide the forested backdrop that gives Mount Gretna its character.

The newest proposal now before stockholders is different.

It would not transfer land from one part of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua community to another. It would transfer ownership outside the Chautauqua altogether.

I support permanently protecting the Southern Woodlands.

I do not support selling them.

Not because I oppose conservation, but because conservation and ownership are not mutually exclusive.

A conservation alternative already exists.

Last year, stockholders were presented with two resolutions addressing the future of the Southern Woodlands. Resolution B, which I submitted, would have permanently protected the land through a conservation easement while retaining ownership. When both proposals were tabled pending additional education and discussion, I developed a stewardship proposal to ensure that progress toward stewardship could continue while the future of the Southern Woodlands was being debated. I view a conservation easement and long-term stewardship as complementary parts of the same conservation strategy.

The stewardship proposal calls for hiring a qualified consultant to develop a practical roadmap for stewardship—identifying forest health needs, invasive species management, habitat improvements, trail protection, ecological priorities, and funding opportunities. It was intentionally broader than the Southern Woodlands because the Southern Woodlands are not the only communal lands remaining from the original Coleman tract. They are simply the portion receiving the most attention today.

The goal was never simply to save ~15 acres.

The goal was to create a framework for stewarding all of the remaining communal lands entrusted to us.

One of the arguments made in favor of the sale is that it would provide funding to steward the remaining Chautauqua communal lands. In effect, the proposal asks us to give up our largest remaining tract in order to fund stewardship of the smaller parcels. But stewardship and ownership need not be separated. The same conservation programs and stewardship funding opportunities being used to support acquisition can also support land that remains under Pennsylvania Chautauqua ownership. In other words, stewardship does not require a sale—it requires a commitment to steward.

That is the irony at the center of this discussion.

If conservation is the objective, we can achieve it ourselves through an easement and stewardship approach that retains ownership.

We can place a conservation easement on the Southern Woodlands.

We can pursue Community Conservation Partnerships Program funding and other grants to support long-term stewardship of the land.

We can permanently protect the land while retaining ownership of it.

In other words, the choice before us is not conservation versus no conservation.

It is conservation through sale or conservation through stewardship.

One transfers ownership away from the Pennsylvania Chautauqua.

The other keeps the land within the community while protecting it permanently and benefiting from the expertise and stewardship resources of the conservancy.

Protected land continues to provide value. It protects the character of the community. It supports wildlife habitat. It strengthens the forest that surrounds us. It remains eligible for future stewardship and conservation funding. It continues to connect future generations to the landscape that helped define Mount Gretna from the beginning.

Most importantly, it remains part of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua.

Previous generations preserved this land through difficult times. Through economic downturns, changing vacation habits, world wars, the Great Depression, and periods when the future of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua was far less certain than it is today, they continued to steward it. 

They chose to keep it.

Now we must decide whether we will do the same.

The question before us is not whether the Southern Woodlands should be conserved.

The question is whether we value this inheritance enough to keep it as part of the Pennsylvania Chautauqua.

For me, the answer is yes. I will vote to keep our land in Chautauqua ownership.

— Deb Simpson, Pennsylvania Chautauqua Stockholder and Mount Gretna Resident