The current plan severely impacts trees, wildlife, our watershed, and us humans. Learn the facts about the many aspects of this plan below and educate your friends.

 FAQs

About the trees

  • 1,139 in Phase 1 and up to 225 in Phase 2, for a total of 1,364, which represent one half of the trees inventoried and over one third of the trees on the course. This is equivalent to 8 acres of forest, or a city block full of trees. See FONSI D-2 page 5.

  • Among the 1,324 trees that will be removed in phase 1 and the 225 that can be removed in phase 2 are the following native trees:

    Acer Rubrum (1 out of 1)

    American Beech (39 out of 205)

    American Elm (13 out of 26)

    American Holly (24 out of 42)

    American Hornbeam (9 out of 32)

    American Sycamore (1 out of 11)

    Ash-leaf Maple (61 out of 116)

    Black Cherry (212 out of 313)

    Black Gum (63 out of 132)

    Black Locust (91 out of 112)

    Black Oak (11 out of 25)

    Black Walnut (25 out of 46)

    Chestnut Oak (4 out of 4)

    Common Persimmon (5 out of 6)

    Devil’s Walkingstick (3 out of 4)

    Eastern Red Cedar (6 out of 36)

    Flowering Dogwood (9 out of 23)

    Green Ash (3 out of 6)

    Mockernut Hickory (21 out of 51)

    Northern Catalpa (23 out of 36)

    Northern Red Oak (10 out of 35)

    Pignut Hickory (29 out of 62)

    Pin Oak (9 out of 18)

    Red Maple (98 out of 207)

    River Birch (1 out of 1)

    Sassafras (29 out of 52)

    Silver Maple (3 out of 3)

    Southern Red Oak (19 out of 37)

    Sugar Maple (6 out of 18)

    Tulip Tree (285 out of 748)

    White Oak (31 out of 65)

    Willow Oak (1 out 3)

    Yellow Buckeye (3 out of 3)

  • 57 Heritage Trees will be removed in Phase 1, and up to 62 additional Heritage Trees might be removed as part of Phase 2. In total, under the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI D-2 Page 5), NPS is giving NLT authority to remove up to 119 Heritage Trees.

  • The Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital, Federal Environment Element, Section G page 17 states that Trees 31.85-inches in diameter (100 inches in circumference) or greater may not be removed, unless:

    a. Removal is critical to accomplishing the mission of the agency and planning/design alternatives that would preserve such tree(s) have been explored and determined incapable of accommodating program requirements, or

    b. The tree(s) are considered invasive, hazardous, or high risk per an Arborist’s evaluation.

    The mission of the agency (NPS) is to conserve “unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations”.

  • Only 3 of the 1,364 trees slated for removal are dead. See this ARCGIS ma for more details.

  • Only 178 or 13% of the 1,364 trees slated for removal are invasive.

  • NLT and NPS constantly mention trees are being removed because they are dangerous to the community. We asked how many of the trees present an imminent clear danger. We have yet to receive an answer.

  • According to the FONSI (D-2 page 5):

    • 591 trees will be removed because, according to NPS, they are unsafe, in poor condition or dead, or are non-native species.

    • 395 trees will be removed to make space for the additional par-3 9 hole course, broaden existing fairways, create an artificial pond for irrigation purposes, and relocate the maintenance building to a densely forested area.

    • 153 trees will be removed to increase sunlight and air circulation to grow turf.

    However, the tree survey states that between phase 1 and phase 2 removal:

    591 trees will be removed because they are an poor condition or invasive (invasive trees represent 197 of trees removed).

    up to 481 trees will be removed for “grading”, in other words to make space for the additional par-3 9 hole course, broaden existing fairways, create an artificial pond for irrigation purposes, and relocate the maintenance building to a densely forested area.

    up to 292 trees will be removed to increase sunlight and air circulation to grow turf.

    It is important to note that the quasi totality of the trees in poor condition are so because of invasive vines. Invasive vines can and should be removed before a tree is felled because the vines are affecting its health.

  • We wish we knew! NLT is changing this number by the day. Regardless of the number, new trees are significantly smaller than existing trees (less shade, less stormwater-absorbing roots, less habitat for animals, etc), have a worryingly low survival rate due to climate change, and are expensive to plant and care for.

  • The tree survey only surveyed trees with a diameter of 4” or more. We do not know how many trees with a diameter of less than 4” will be removed.

About the youth

  • There has been no systematic effort by NLT that we are aware of to engage the general public of youth in the planning process. Youth are some of the most conscious people about climate change, and will be impacted by it for many years to come. NLT's plan to cut down over 1000 trees in Rock Creek Park worsens this trend of climate destruction. NLT defining one of their goals as expanding access to golf for youth ignores the fact that this project disregards the principles of environmental sustainability that many youth value so much.

  • We laud NLT's plan to empower youth through the Jack Vardaman Workforce Development Program. It is unclear how many youth this program will impact over time, but even a handful of youth being exposed to workforce opportunities and our beautiful public golf courses is a good thing. That said, parents and children will benefit more in the long run from a robust ecosystem. Every heritage tree cut is lost forever. There isn't time to replace them. Climate change is happening here and now.

    We also believe it is an and, not an or. NLT can give scholarships without enacting this plan, which takes a massive environmental toll.

  • Youth are already stepping up to be part of advocacy against NLT's plan. Multiple youth testified against the plan at its hearing, and high school students Elsa Boehm and Jaiya Joubert are leading efforts for an alternative plan that does less environmental damage to our parks, and even wrote this Q&A section! Creating a plan that reduces the number of trees cut down and lessens the impact of unsustainable lighting and development on the ecosystem is vital for youth. It gives us the opportunity to enjoy the park in all of its natural beauty, while still preserving our future planet.

  • By consulting youth, we engage the people that will have to deal with the fall-out of environmental destruction for many years to come. Whenever a project is implemented, we should truly think about how it will impact those who come after us. Though a beautified golf course would provide a community space for youth, we must balance this with the need to maintain youth's safety and wellbeing in the long run. NLT cannot make judgements about whether their efforts help youth before taking steps to genuinely engage many of them in this project.

  • "If we want to help the DC community and provide them with opportunity, we should protect our tree canopy, elevate youth and stakeholder voices, make space for us to enjoy our forests even as we play sports. Writing a blank check to deforestation efforts would hurt our communities more than helping them." -- Elsa Boehm, a student at BASIS DC

    "One of the stated goals of this tree destruction is to allow more youth to play golf, but no one asked us if we want to, let alone if we’d be ok sacrificing a ton of trees for it” -- Jaiya Joubert, a student at School Without Walls

    “I'm ten years old. i go in rock creek all the time to run with my mom ,its beautiful especially the trees and it would hurt my heart if you cut them down and not just me but a lot of other people and evan the animals you would be killing there home how would you feel if somebody just came up to your house and ruined it. please don't cut down the trees for everybody the loves rock creek park like me. Thanks” Students residing in 20002

    “I do not think that a gol[f] course is not what we need in the area, we already have so many! I would like to see this space used truly as a park, convert the land into hiking trails and play areas for kids. Who would a golf course cater to? Those who undoubtedly already have access to a golf course in the area. While this may bring in revenue, I think we can find other ways of sourcing revenue which would provide more equitable entertainment to those who live around Rock Creek Park. I currently attend University of Maryland and my friends and I enjoy going out there on the weekends, cater to experiences like those! Golf is similar to tennis in that it is slowly going away as form of mainstream enjoyment, I don't think this will be a long-lasting source of revenue.” College student residing in 20782

    “People who golf can afford to golf anywhere. We cannot afford to keep cutting down trees. Everyone likes trees. Not everyone likes golf. Everyone needs trees. Absolutely no one needs golf. Please prioritize the important things like life over something arbitrary like golf.” Student residing in 20002

    “I am a 12-year-old living in DC I am very fond of the woods in the golf course, which has been an adventurous, lively, and inspiring place for me to explore and grow in. Me and my friends, who go to the District of Columbia International School, walk down to Rock Creek Park every Friday, and even sometimes into the golf course. I have walked into the golf course at night, and seen full bushes and fields full of fireflies while hearing coyotes howl. It is a place for local wildlife to thrive and be seen by DC residents. The forest cover in Rock Creek Golf Course provides significant ecosystem services and habitat benefits to visitors and wildlife. Removing over 1,200 trees will surely harm the ability of this area to support these vital functions and the species that call it home, to the detriment of all of us who call DC home. I am asking the National Park Service to reconsider the proposed plan and re-evaluate the metrics used to determine how many trees must be removed, prioritizing saving trees that form the cores of forest patches that are designated for removal. Losing this many trees at a time when the District's canopy is already shrinking would be a terrible loss.” Student residing in 20012

    “Hi, I'm a DC Student, and I am a student at […]. I am writing to let you know that I think that the plan to cut down all of these trees is not a good idea. This will hurt the environment in many ways. First of all, it will be a big loss of habitat for the animals that live there. This includes rabbits/bunnies, deer, birds, squirrels, and many others. This also hurts the air, because the trees help regulate the air temperature, which helps prevent global warming. Please consider this!” Student residing in 20002

    “These trees are absolutely critical to our ecosystem. You're telling me that in 2023, with all of our knowledge of climate change, you're actively choosing to prioritize a GOLF COURSE over a natural environment? Please stop and think about the impact that removing 1,200 trees could have on every single species that uses them to survive” Latin American Youth Center (youth organization)

    “Hello, I am a student, and I just went to rock creek park earlier this week. At the end of our trip the teacher told us that the organization that was taking over the rock creek golf course wanted to remove almost half of the trees. After I had just walked through a path and saw all of the trees surrounding, I know that I wouldn't be able to imagine it with less trees. The organization wants to remove 49% of all of the trees, that is one percent away from half. The damage that would be done to that area would take time to heal. The worst part of it though, is that in the process of taking away all of the trees, many of the animals habitats would be destroyed. In the process heavy machinery will take all of the trees, how many animals will get killed in the process? We already have 67 golf courses in DC, why do we need 1 more?” Student resident of 20011

    “We are students and we're telling you to not cut down those trees.If you cut down those 1,200 trees more than 100 different animal species will lose their home and you're the park rangers you don't want that.Also with less trees to soak up the water than the drains will get clogged and it will cause flooding.With less trees not only will we get less clean air the animal will lose the clean air that they breath.Also with climate change the air quality will go very high without a lot of trees like the one in canada.You got to not cut down those trees!!” Student residing in 20002

About the wildlife

  • Coyotes, woodpeckers, migratory birds, everything that lives in the rest of the forest lives in those trees too: owls, birds of prey, migratory birds, woodpeckers. This forest is also home to a handful of endangered bat species that are already struggling due to the pervasive fungal infection white-nose syndrome. Even poor-quality forest is important for wildlife.

  • Many birds call this golf course home.

    Purple Martins, whose populations have declined by 72% percent since 2002 have had a house on the golf course for the last 55-60 years. A change in the surrounding ecosystem would no doubt affect this safe haven for Purple Martins.

    The golf course is also the most reliable breeding site for the American Woodcock.

  • The forest habitat in this watershed is critically important in protecting and sustaining this wetland system and in providing critical and vulnerable habitat for sensitive wildlife species. For example, the vernal pool next to hole 17 is the only known reliable breeding site in Rock Creek Park for Wood Frogs. After the wood frog tadpoles transform and leave the pool, the surrounding forest habitat provides essential food and shelter and living space for the adult frogs. This is also true for Spring Peepers and American Toads which breed in the vernal pool.

  • Coyotes have been spotted on th course numerous times and can be heard howling at night. They have a den on or nearby the course. See District Coyote Project sightings

About the artificial light after dark

  • Artificial light at night disrupts wildlife and bird migration.

    Birds and other animals use dark hours for reproduction, feeding, migrating, sleep, and predator–prey interactions. Great Horned Owls, for example, nest in a section of the forest set to be clear-cut. Nighttime lighting is also harmful to trees. Artificial lighting in the rest of Rock Creek Park goes dark at sundown for many important reasons.

About the golfers

  • Of the 149 commenters who identified themselves as golfers, more tha half strongly oppose the current plan as “excessive” and “unnecessary.”

About the process

  • We wish we knew! None of the following organizations were engaged, nor do we know of anyone who was, including the direct neighbors to the golf course.

    Casey Trees

    DC Environmental Network

    City Wildlife

    Chesapeake Climate Action Network

    District Department of Energy and Environment

    DC Youth Climate Corps

    Anacostia Watershed Society

    Ward 8 Woods Conservancy

    DC Bird Alliance

    Sierra Club

    Langdon Park Forest Stewards

    Anacostia Parks & Community Collaborative

    Nature Forward (formerly known as Audubon Naturalist Society)

    Anacostia Rivekeepers

    Citizens’ Climate Lobby DC Chapter

    People’s Alliance for Rock Creek

  • The extensive tree removal was not mentioned at all in the public engagement of January 2023 or July 2023 or in the many ANC and community meeting presentations. The first time it was mentioned was in the Environmental Assessment made public in the fall of 2023. See Timeline page.

  • NPS states that it took into consideration the comments requesting that fewer trees be removed. However, the plan went from 1,262 trees removed in the Environmental Assessment to 1,139 trees removed in phase one and up to 225 removed in phase 2. If that is less trees, it is definitely not what those who vehemently opposed the plan had in mind.

  • The public was presented with a false choice -- doing nothing or accepting an environmental catastrophe just to have someone take care of the golf course after decades of neglect. If they had truly wanted to engage the public, NPS and NLT should have presented us with a third option.

  • As of May 11th, we have not been given sufficient details about the trees to be planted, what funds are being put towards maintenance after the initial redevelopment, and how the features of the redevelopment as planned will concretely benefit the low income neighbors of the course.

  • Currently, all of the environmental damage is front-loaded and the mitigation comes after. If NLT, which is a new organization with lofty fundraising goals, does not manage to fundraise enough, the mitigation might never happen. And the public would have no recourse.

  • By issuing the FONSI (see Timeline page), NPS has rubber stamped NLT’s “rehabilitation” plan. But this is far from a done deal.

    The National Capital Planning Commission has not yet given its final approval, and he DC Council has not yet approved the use of the District revenue bonds NLT needs to finance the project.

    As one of our favorite Weed Warriors says, “until the trees are there, it is not too late.”