Share
Students and faculty members are mounting opposition to a proposed indoor athletic practice facility that would eliminate a portion of the Stadium Woods — a rare old-growth forest behind Lane Stadium.
As the athletics department attempts to set plans for the facility, which would provide the football team and other Virginia Tech programs with a place to practice during inclement weather, it has encountered a strong pushback led by members of the university's forestry department.
The controversy can be seen many ways — athletics threatening education, environmentalism taking on endless expansion — but must ultimately be decided based on the value of the space to the university community.
So what does the community stand to gain from the proposed facility? The new fieldhouse would be a state-of-the-art indoor practice space for the Hokies football team and any other program that needed it during bad weather. Multiple other major football programs — including ACC rivals Florida State and Virginia — are either finishing similar facilities or building them right now. Tech's facility would bolster the football program's recruiting effort as Shane Beamer attempts to help the program his father built take the next step and win a national championship.
Tech football's giant revenue base should grow as a result of the improved facilities. The facility's construction seems inevitable, but the question of where is still hotly contested.
The value of the forest is decidedly harder to decipher, but will likely be the key factor in setting the location of the facility. Forestry experts have deemed the area's white oaks — which date back several centuries — a cherished rarity for America's East coast. The university's forestry department uses the Stadium Woods for instructional purposes, and doesn't want to take a chance of losing the historic trees.
Athletic officials say the facility would involve cutting down only about one-fifth of the trees, but forestry department faculty members leading the opposition movement estimate the facility would destroy or damage up to half of the forest's old-growth oaks.
But while that issue needs to be resolved before a final decision is made, the alternative location for the facility may present greater problems. The only other option that has been presented for the practice space would involve bulldozing the tennis courts and roller rink along Washington Street, next to the basketball practice facility.
In addition to creating a potential eyesore adjacent to many of the campus residence halls, the athletic department's plan B would almost certainly hinder the activities of more university students. Many students use the tennis courts, and the roller rink was just rebuilt after being demolished during construction of the basketball team's practice facility.
A relatively smaller number of students and faculty members utilize the Stadium Woods, and they should still be able to use the remaining portion of the forest. Meanwhile, if the woods' supporters win, the entirety of the tennis courts and the roller rink would disappear.
Certainly, if the facility is built in Stadium Woods, appropriate steps should be taken to ensure the survival of the maximum number of ancient white oaks. But it is difficult to see a better alternative to the facility's proposed location.
While the woods' supporters are putting up a loud fight, the number of community members who regularly utilize or even occasionally appreciate the woods does not outweigh the clear and tangible benefits the new practice facility would provide to the university community as a whole.
The editorial board is comprised of the editors of the Collegiate Times.
A version of this article appeared in the Apr 10 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 25 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
This was one of the more well written editorial board pieces I have read in a while. That said, I think if you look at the planning that went into this facility, it's easy to see that the "plans A&B" were hatched overnight and certainly cannot be the only options on the table. We have some of the most brilliant people in the country working at this university, there has to be a reasonable plan C, D, E, etc. Also, the woods are state property, not just this university. Those woods have value to people all across this state, and our land-grant mission cannot forget that. PS-football's "giant" revenue is laughable if you look at the school budget and what they spend (is 1% "giant"?).
Reply to this Top
What wasn't well-written was that comment.
Reply to this Top
so it is a "state-of-the-art facility" that would be a "potential eyesore?"
but you know, so our athletics teams don't have to practice in bad weather, let's destroy exceedingly valuable and rare natural resources all for the sake of winning a national championship.
Reply to this Top
I don't see why they can't build on the parking lot next to cassell. That would be right next door to the locker room facility and they wouldn't even need to remove all of the parking. If they build this in either location, it would be a situation where athletics are being put over of student interests (students use tennis/roller hockey rink and the stadium woods for forestry classes) and that is not ok.
Reply to this Top
I don't see why they can't build on the parking lot next to cassell. That would be right next door to the locker room facility and they wouldn't even need to remove all of the parking. If they build this in either location, it would be a situation where athletics are being put over of student interests (students use tennis/roller hockey rink and the stadium woods for forestry classes) and that is not ok.
Reply to this Top
Rather than building ANOTHER athletic facility, how about we finally get the College of Science a proper building? Wouldn't that be cool?
Why aren't we investing this much money to attract high-ranking students? Researchers? Prestigious professors? Virginia Tech has a spending hardon for the superfluous. It'd be nice to see a university invest in being, you know, a university.
Top
On one hand, we have education at risk, the very thing this university was established to provide. On the other, we have the a football team, whose games generate a great deal of revenue for our school so it can, in turn, provide more/better educational opportunities to its students. I'm confused about the necessity of a state-of-the-art indoor practice facility for the team. So the team won't play outside in nasty weather anymore? Ever? Spectators still show up in droves to cheer those boys on and sit in the rain, wind, and cold to do so. So what if the players get a little wet at practice- they’ll get wet and cold at the games right along with their fans. There is something to be said for training in the conditions in which you play. Every game won't be 65 degree and dry; there will be wet fields and chilly winds. Is the comfort of a rather small percentage of the student population worth cutting down centuries-old trees that benefit other students? I fail to see how a covered practice facility benefits the 'community as a whole' since only a select group of people would get to use or enjoy it while a variety of educational departments, as well as the VTCC, who use the forest for training, would lose that asset. These trees were part of Virginia Tech before the football team was what it is. Sometimes you need to stick to your roots (pun intended).
Reply to this Top
On one hand, we have education at risk, the very thing this university was established to provide. On the other, we have the a football team, whose games generate a great deal of revenue for our school so it can, in turn, provide more/better educational opportunities to its students. I'm confused about the necessity of a state-of-the-art indoor practice facility for the team. So the team won't play outside in nasty weather anymore? Ever? Spectators still show up in droves to cheer those boys on and sit in the rain, wind, and cold to do so. So what if the players get a little wet at practice- they’ll get wet and cold at the games right along with their fans. There is something to be said for training in the conditions in which you play. Every game won't be 65 degree and dry; there will be wet fields and chilly winds. Is the comfort of a rather small percentage of the student population worth cutting down centuries-old trees that benefit other students? I fail to see how a covered practice facility benefits the 'community as a whole' since only a select group of people would get to use or enjoy it while a variety of educational departments, as well as the VTCC, who use the forest for training, would lose that asset. These trees were part of Virginia Tech before the football team was what it is. Sometimes you need to stick to your roots (pun intended).
Reply to this Top
Isn't the College of Science still located in a mobile home?
Reply to this Top
Yes, the COS still is still in trailers. They were supposed to be used for only 10 years, but we now closing in on 20 years.
Reply to this Top
Yeah, we're certainly "inventing the future" by keeping the college of science in trailers.
Top
Like the first "Anonymous" poster, there cannot be just two options, A: use a portion of the stadium woods, and B: demolish the tennis courts and hockey rink. I think the real issue with this article is the author's entirely anthropocentric ideology.
I charge each of you to walk through the stadium woods when you are not intoxicated on the way to a football game. It is a beautiful and meaningful part of this campus, and it would be an incredible shame to see any part of it go. You can start making opinions after you survey the scene.
Reply to this Top
I would like to disagree with the editorial's last statement that "the number of community members who regularly utilize or even occasionally appreciate the woods does not outweigh the clear and tangible benefits the new practice facility would provide to the university community as a whole." I see nothing clear or tangible that would benefit the vast majority of students, faculty and community members by constructing this facility. I see it helping our football team....which is nice, but at the expense of something that is irreplaceable in our lifetime. You know something is amiss when the university praises it's experienced, world renowned faculty when they do excellent research and bring in grants, but ignores their expertise and opinion when it conflicts with football. It's not just a bunch of tree hugger hippies who are trying to save these trees. Concerned faculty, staff, students and community members all see the value of the Stadium Woods. Do not belittle this group of people by dismissing the value of these ancient trees as non-tangible or unclear when compared to a "state-of-the-art" practice facility. If our university wants to say that Virginia Tech has something that FSU, Clemson, UVA or any other football rival does not have, then let them say that we have a forest of trees on campus that is older and rarer than any other campus in this nation. Why tear down something that makes our campus unique and valuable in order to conform to what everyone else is doing?
Reply to this Top
So, a practice facility that is one to two minutes closer than the other will win us a national championship? It would make no difference. Why harm some of the oldest trees on the east coast that have incredibly valuable academic and historical resources to offer? It doesn't need to be stadium woods vs. the tennis courts; an extra football facility is not paramount at the moment. Just check the forecast before deciding where to hold practice.
Reply to this Top
Why haven't they considered construction on the existing outdoor practice fields, or on the "Chicken Hill" parking lot(s)? There seem to be a lot of options out there.
Reply to this Top
I wish that the tennis courts and hockey rink would not have to be moved. There are other locations for the building BUT they will not seriously consider them. They have dismissed the parking lot across from the Merryman Center even though a parking Garage is planned for that area (see University Master Plan). Further, the area the tennis courts and hockey ring are on is designated in the University Master Plan as "Athletics". NOT recreational sports "Athletics". The plans have been for those facilities (tennis and hockey) to be moved and a very large NEW recreational sports complex is in the master plan. Further still if the new practice facility doesn't go along Washington Street the University has plans for another building in that location...point being the tennis courts will not be there in the near future. So the editorial opinion is to save something that just isn't going to be saved regardless of where the practice facility is placed. In the even shorter term where do you think the staging (trailers, materials, heavy equipment) is going to be put for a building being constructed in the woods... exactly... on the tennis courts and hockey rink. Why do we let them run roughshod over us every time. They rebuilt the hockey rink (after long delays) in an area that they knew was going to be used for something else. They probably didn't mention that to the club. Just a slight oversight...no harm.
Reply to this Top
The Marching Virginians are planning to build an indoor practice facility & outdoor field on Chicken Hill.
Reply to this Top
It's surprising, but it seems that the CT's Editorial Board failed to consult the Virginia Tech Master Plan when writing this opinion piece. It's what's on the books now, and is supposedly guiding the university's decisions in this process, so it's worth a look.
With that in mind, there's no long-term future for the tennis courts on Washington Street. As John indicates, that is "Atheltics" department space according to pages 11 & 12 of the 2009 Virginia Tech Master Plan Amendment. (http://www.facilities.vt.edu/documents/oup/masterplan/2009_land_use.pdf)
Furthermore, pages 28 & 29 talk about relocating tennis courts in the Oak Lane expansion when the golf course goes away. However, the roller-hockey rink isn't mentioned at all. Thus, those folks are going to need to make more noise & get promises in writing, since apparently they've been burned before.
Perhaps most important to this debate, when addressing & assessing value, the Master Plan identifies the Stadium Woods site as an environmental and cultural greenway, defined as “a significant reservation of lands, waterways, tree stands, and cultural landmarks for future generations” (p 10). That indicates the land has value beyond academic pursuits alone, which should already trump Athletic Dept. needs. For what it's worth, this designation also includes the Drillfield and the Duck Pond.
Reply to this Top
yes, this is true
Reply to this Top
As a Blacksburg resident, the Stadium Woods -- which naturally and magnificently define the town from the University -- belong as much to me and my neighbors as to Tech. The Stadium Woods are of the same value and importance to me as to Tech.
But it is the present student body who must answer to their children and grandchildren for any sacrifice of the Woods that these student permit to happen at this time. Ever since the invention of the mimeograph machine, students have successfully confronted on-campus moral and ethical questions. With some more push from faculty and the wider community, students can succeed again.
Reply to this Top
Unlike our bully football team, these trees have answered the bell during the 4th quarter for over 300 years and don't choke when the pressure is on. F Virginia Tech football, the perennial choke artists of college football.
Reply to this Top
Botanists everywhere are on the search for heirloom seedlings to protect and preserve. Meanwhile,Tech figures contemplate the destruction of part or all of these ancient, magnificent woods.
It is the present day students who must answer to their childlren and grandchildren for any destruction of these Woods, including demolishing for all time the heirloom seedings still waiting to be discovered there. Get with it, students -- now!
Reply to this Top
Quite fascinating info !Perfect just what I was searching for!
lv bags http://pandorachainssale.webs.com/
Reply to this Top
Hello I identified the No cost Simple Shopping Icons Download | Style, Tech and Internet post quite intriguing therefore I're included our track-back for it on my own webpage, continue the fantastic job:)
replica lv https://www.box.com/s/e3s4e6lsb1wuyxzt7d64
Reply to this Top
frajiaxwk <a href="http://www.timberlandschuhede.eu/26-womens-timberland-sandalen-stiefel/" title="Frauen Timberland Sandalen Stiefel">Frauen Timberland Sandalen Stiefel</a>
Reply to this Top