Cumberland Island National Seashore land exchange talk spurs concern
by
Kurt Repanshek
https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2026/06/cumberland-island-national-seashores-land-exchange-talk-spurs-concern
Fifty-four years after members of Congress stated their desire to see Cumberland Island National Seashore “permanently preserved in its primitive state” the National Park Service is in closed-door discussions for land exchanges that could see eight or more 15,000-square-foot homes built within the national seashore.
The discussions, which have spurred Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and a virhttps://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2026/06/cumberland-island-national-seashores-land-exchange-talk-spurs-concerntual town hall scheduled for Tuesday evening by groups greatly concerned about the proposed exchanges that involve hundreds of acres within the seashore, add to worries over how the Park Service is managing the largest undeveloped barrier island on the East Coast.
Cumberland Island off the Georgia coastline embraces a maritime wonderland with roughly 20,000 acres of official and potential wilderness, 18 miles of protected beaches, threatened and endangered species, and maritime forests filled with moss-draped live oaks, and salt marshes.
Work to engineer the four land exchanges comes at a contentious time there for the Park Service, which has been working on a controversial visitor use plan, has failed over the past 40 years to develop an agency- and Wilderness Act-required wilderness management plan, and has appeared to ignore a federal judge’s suggestion that it better care for feral horses on the island.
“I think the crux of this issue is that this is not the only thing that's happening at Cumberland Island,” Kelly Cox, a senior policy and planning specialist at Defenders of Wildlife who FOIAed Park Service documents concerning the pending land exchanges, said Monday. “There is kind of a cocktail of issues that's going on at Cumberland right now, and we cannot view these land exchanges in isolation. I think that's why the public is up in arms about it.”
The lack of transparency has concerned not only Cox at Defenders and Jessica Howell-Edwards, executive director of Wild Cumberland, a group that advocates for the national seashore’s wilderness, but also former Park Service superintendents somewhat baffled by Cumberland Island Superintendent Melissa Trenchik’s handling of the exchange discussions as well as the visitor use and wilderness plans.
If the exchanges involve “anything more than a trivial amount of land with no implications for resources and no hint of controversy, National Environmental Protection Act and National Historic Preservation Act compliance is definitely required. The controversy alone should kick it from an (environmental assessment) to an (environmental impact statement),” said Bob Krumenaker, who over his 40+-year NPS career was superintendent of both Apostle Islands National Seashore in Wisconsin and Big Bend National Park in Texas.
Krumenaker further added that “there is a requirement that lands being exchanged be evaluated. It seems to me this is a major federal action. Its environmental consequences are uncertain, and there’s controversy. Hence an (EIS), frankly, not an (EA should be performed. But that controversy must be about the environmental impacts rather than the action itself. Seems to me allowing construction of large homes on what is now NPS land would qualify.”
Mike Murray, who ended his career as superintendent of Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina, said Cumberland Island staff could have included a wilderness management plan as part of its visitor use planning process.
“However, allowing significant increases in visitation to the wilderness area(s) now, as proposed in the Visitor Use Management Plan at Cumberland Island, absent a well-reasoned wilderness management plan, is a significant concern,” he said.
Click to view entire imageLack of details have raised concerns over how much land the Park Service is agreeing to exchange, along with word that the agency will allow 15,000-square-foot houses to be built on the exchanged properties/NPS file.
Primitive State
Those who worked in 1972 on the legislation to create the national seashore were adamant that its wilderness character be preserved.
“Except for certain portions of the seashore deemed to be especially adaptable for recreational uses, particularly swimming, boating, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, and other recreational activities of similar nature … the seashore shall be permanently preserved in its primitive state,” states a section of the legislation.
Nine years later, in 1981 during discussion around designating official wilderness within Cumberland Island, then-U.S. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, said the “bill constitutes a further step to reduce the impact and influence of man and his activities on the natural landscape of the island, and much of the acreage which is designated in this bill as potential wilderness will change to pure wilderness with the passage of time and the disappearance of facilities and activities which are contrary to wilderness.”
Despite those intents, critics say the Park Service today has turned a blind eye toward accomplishing that mission. While the exchanges outlined by the Park Service would add private acres to the national seashore, those who own them would, apparently in all but one swap, gain acreage with utilities, roads and docks in place, and permission to build 15,000-square-foot homes up to 35 feet tall.
But in an email reply to the National Parks Traveler's questions, Park Service staff said two preliminary agreements signed for land exchanges so far "represent an early step in a proposed land exchange process that remains subject to additional review, including completion of an environmental assessment and a public comment period anticipated this fall."
As for the massive homes that would be allowed under the preliminary agreements, those "limits come directly from the conservation easements the National Park Service negotiated with the landowners. These limits are designed to significantly restrict development, maintain the island’s natural character, and protect key visitor use areas and sensitive resources," the Park Service email said. "The 15,000-square-foot figure represents the combined footprint for all allowable structures on a parcel, including a home and any small outbuildings. The height limits apply regardless of the number of stories."
While some believe one of the private landowners would, if their exchange is approved, retain a parcel adjacent to the Cumberland Island Wilderness that they received more than $9 million along with a lifetime occupancy agreement from the Park Service in 1982, the Park Service said that "is incorrect."
Howell-Edwards believes the details that have surfaced so far regarding the exchanges fall short of what Congress envisioned when it established the national seashore in 1972.
“If we are to respect the original Congressional intent of Cumberland Island National Seashore and its Wilderness designation, every parcel of land on the island would have a plan in place to eventually convert to federal ownership and the island would become an increasingly wilder, more ecologically-valuable resource for future generations of Georgia,” said she said in an email to the Traveler. “By prioritizing the in-holders’ desires over public interests and process, the NPS has abdicated its responsibility to future generations.”
Fully Baked?
At Defenders, Cox said the lack of information from the Park Service was particularly unnerving considering the documents she received through the FOIA request. Two years ago the Park Service, in what it described as a “pre-NEPA” step, released some information, but not “a fully baked idea,” she said.
But Park Service emails from last August and September pertaining to two of the four exchanges indicate that the agency seemed to have reached preliminary agreements with the landowners, she said, while the public has been left in the dark as to exactly how much land the agency is willing to hand over in return.
“If you took any look at those draft deeds and preliminary exchange agreements, they now seem very fully baked,” Cox said during a phone call. “It seems to us like there should have been an intermediary opportunity between 2024 and 2026 for the public to weigh in on whether or not those locations are good, whether or not there are impacts or alternatives that need to be considered, things of that nature.”
The Defenders staffer said evidence that the exchanges were “fully baked” also came earlier this year when Trenchik appeared before the Camden County (Georgia) Commission seeking support of the exchanges so the Park Service could access Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars to support the swaps.
“We're scratching our heads and asking why hasn't the public had an update until this point?” said Cox. The Park Service is “asking for funding support from the county commission and yet in these past two years it's been radio silence from the park.”
Additionally, she said, while Trenchik has said the exchanges are seen as a way to consolidate private inholdings in one area of the park to improve wildlife habitat connectivity, it seems like the exchanges would “prime an area for development.”
Former U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn, a Georgia Republican who worked to see official wilderness established on the national seashore, in 1982 during discussion of official wilderness designation for Cumberland Island foresaw problems that would be created in years ahead by a handful of private properties on the island.
"The existence within this wilderness area of a number of privately owned life estates, and of retained rights to vehicular access along the primitive island roads presents a unique management challenge,” said Nunn. “The ultimate goal in the Cumberland Island wilderness plan is to phase out activities or uses which are nonconforming to wilderness as soon as it is practical to do so, and these vehicular access uses are to be considered special and limited. Such uses which presently exist should not be considered or allowed to become traditional or established, as such term is used in the Wilderness Act.”
Park Service officials maintain that they're keeping in line with that desire.
"The proposed exchanges are intended to address long-term management considerations for natural, cultural and visitor resources on the island and to consolidate land ownership in areas where National Park Service and private lands are intermingled," the agency said in reply to the Traveler's questions. "The National Park Service welcomes public participation and will provide additional information when the environmental assessment is released for public comment."
At Wild Cumberland, Howell-Edwards said that the Park Service has created the predicament by not working to ensure the mission outlined by the enabling legislation.
“[P]utting off acquisitions until threats are imminent, and treating each problem individually when it arises, facilitates the ability for influential landowners and individual members of Congress to influence park policy. This is precisely what’s happening at Cumberland Island National Seashore," she said.