Paradise lost? Changes coming to Cumberland Island

I’m willing to wager that people who enjoy hiking and camping in Ft. Clinch State Park, kayaking through Egans Creek or spotting an alligator at the beach also relish Amelia Island’s close access to Cumberland Island, a (mostly) undeveloped wilderness just over the Florida-Georgia border.

Wandering Cumberland Island is like going back in time. If you haven’t been there, imagine Amelia Island with no cars.  No pavement. No stores. No houses. No hotels. No restaurants. No sirens. Imagine only flora and fauna and water. Imagine canopies of live oaks as far as the eye can see. Imagine solitude.

Yet, I’m worried that many Cumberland fans are unaware that what they love about Cumberland, perhaps even hold sacred, is in jeopardy.

Acquired by the federal government in 1972 and designated a federally protected National Seashore, Cumberland Island is facing at least two major changes that threaten the federal government’s original intent to hold the island a primitive paradise in perpetuity.

I’m hoping this update inspires readers to take action to help stop these changes.

First Change: More Visitors Allowed, More Services Coming

Effective Aug. 28, the National Park Service (NPS) adopted a new Visitor Use Management Plan that more than doubles the number of ferry visitors allowed per day from 300 to 700. This expansion is moving forward even though the current number of daily visitors using the St. Marys public ferry is about 165, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC).

The plan, which NPS says is designed to “reduce the barriers to visiting,” also:

• Expands nightly camping capacity from 220 to 304
• Allows for commercial services and facilities, including kayak rentals, a general store, two beach shade pavilions, expanded cycling areas, and a new bathhouse with showers.
• Adds twice-monthly ferry service from St. Marys to the restored Plum Orchard mansion on Cumberland, opening a third public dock.

These changes appear to violate the February 2014 Foundation Document, Cumberland Island National Seashore, prepared by NPS, which calls out the island’s “uncrowded setting” as one of its fundamental values:

Cumberland Island National Seashore’s physical isolation provides visitors opportunities to experience outdoor recreation in an uncrowded, undeveloped setting. Moreover, this isolation helps to preserve and protect the island’s fragile natural and cultural resources.

The 2014 document lists threats to this value, including “demand for increase in visitor access to the island” and “increasing and unmanaged visitation via private boat.”

It also lists the laws, executive orders, and regulations that ensure the value isn’t violated or disregarded. These include Cumberland Island wilderness legislation (1982, 2004), Cumberland Island National Seashore enabling legislation (PL 92-536), and the Wilderness Act of 1964.

Questions emerge.

Why is the visitor plan changing to be inconsistent with a core value? One possible answer is that the 2014 document called for an updated plan, and NPS has been trying to finalize one ever since. It has taken more than a decade, in part because previous drafts were heavily criticized by the public and conservation and environmental groups. The new plan, drafted in 2025, received similar pushback and more than 3000 public comments, which some say were summarily dismissed, before being adopted a month ago.

Why make these changes when the public doesn’t want them? With only about half the current allowable number visiting each day, it makes me wonder if NPS or the companies it contracts with for expanded ferry and concessions will embark on a marketing campaign to attract those additional visitors. I imagine billboards on our roads, fliers in our mailboxes, ads invading our computers and phones. This leads me to assume an increase in ferry and park entrance fees. Worse, it conjures Cumberland littered with cups, lids, straws, napkins, plasticware. And then there’s this vision: someone or some groups laughing all the way to the bank.  

At her 85th birthday celebration at the St. Marys waterfront this past Saturday, Carol Ruckdeschel, Cumberland’s most famous resident, shared her concerns. Ruckdeschel has lived on Cumberland for 50 years and dedicated her life to protecting sea turtles and preserving Cumberland’s wilderness.

“If you come over there to hike in the wilderness, you don’t want bicycles driving by you or motorbikes driving by you. You don’t want to see people,” she told the hundreds of supporters who came to honor her. “And yet the next step we’ve got going in the plans, and right now those plans have been finalized, is to increase development, increase visitation, increase access to wilderness, increase concessions. Any step toward development like that is very unlikely to be undone. That’s the real tragedy here. We don’t know what lawyers can figure out, but that’s where we are today.”

Second Change: Land Swaps Offered to Carnegie and Candler Heirs

NPS is offering federal land to long-time private landowners. Melissa Trenchik, NPS superintendent at Cumberland, wants the public to believe an exchange of federal land for private land will prevent future development.

At last week’s public meeting in St. Marys, Trenchik delivered a 20-minute slide show giving a high-level overview of the plan. She emphasized the need to curb development on private parcels and to improve the “contiguous corridor of federally owned land.” She downplayed the desirability of the federal land that would be given away and the amount of construction private owners would be allowed on their new acquisitions.

After her talk, Trenchik refused to open the floor to questions and answers. She directed the well over 100 people in attendance to information stations throughout the room where their questions could be answered by NPS employees. She encouraged people to read the Voluntary Land Exchange Environmental Assessment.

The meeting felt like more than an orchestrated PR event designed to shut down public conversation than an information session where concerns could be raised and ideas shared among all attendees.

Perhaps that’s because preliminary land exchange agreements have already been signed by NPS and some private owners. Now, NPS is seeking county and state letters of support and compliance approval from the National Environmental Policy Act and other environmental agencies. The last step: final land exchange agreements must be approved by the U.S. Congress.

The swap negotiations began when private owners submitted requests to subdivide their current properties. Some of the families were seeking variances, rezonings or subdivisions to monetize, divide among heirs or build new single-family structures, according to the Savannah Morning News. The AJC reported that Trenchik said some of the proposed development “could force rerouting or closure of hiking trails or alter the primitive feel along a stretch of the beach frequented by visitors.”

In response, NPS offered the swaps. One Carnegie heir would receive 12 out-of-the-way yet scenic acres along the marsh that could hold up to six homes, complete with existing nearby road connection and underground utility lines. The other Carnegie family was offered a neighboring parcel that would allow two more homes. In exchange, the federal government would acquire Carnegie parcels that are crossed by hiking trails or contiguous to wilderness areas and the beach to help improve their ability to manage the national seashore. A proposed land swap with Candler family heirs is ongoing, according to the AJC.

The land exchange restricts development on the two proposed Carnegie properties to single-family homes with total footprints (home, driveway, patio, outbuildings, etc.) of 15,000 square feet and building heights of 35 feet. The AJC reports that even with those restrictions, the height limit allows for two-story structures, which could exceed 15,000 square feet of living space.

Ruckdeschel is against this plan, too, and at her birthday celebration she encouraged people to post their comments on the NPS website.

“This new plan is taking public land that the park has already acquired and giving it to private people to build on with no expiration date. People seem to miss the idea it’s not just the building of big houses and things, but it’s the long-term presence of private people on the island, which is not the vision for Cumberland.”

My closing thought:  America’s national parks belong to the American people, not to wealthy heirs or special interest groups or government agencies or branches of government. If the federal government isn’t willing or able to protect our parks, then we the people must do so. Please make your voice heard and your vote count. And if you haven’t been to Cumberland Island, I suggest you make a trip before this paradise is lost.

What You Can Do

Conservation and environmental groups have formed a coalition to fight the newly adopted visitor plan. For more information, contact Wild Cumberland.

NPS is accepting public comment on the proposed land swap plan through Oct. 16 at 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time. Post your comments here.

April L. Bogle is a communications consultant who moved to Amelia Island five years ago to be as close as possible to Cumberland Island.