Letter to the editor: Savage Highlands State Park — where’s the beef? Where’s the accountability?

Listen to this article

To the editor,

When the Maryland Department of Natural Resources purchased the former Savage River Lodge in 2024, it committed to opening it in the fall of 2025. DNR’s leadership led the Board of Public Works to believe that this facility would be made available for public use with a minimum investment. In the fall of 2025, DNR backpedaled, indicating that the newly named Savage Highlands State Park would be open for limited recreational use in late summer of 2026 and would then close before the winter months.

I recently read DNR’s website for the Savage Highlands State Park and found it contains some interesting language as follows (please note the underlined wording):

“Current access: Public access is currently prohibited while the property is transitioned into a state park. Access to the Mt. Aetna trail system in the state forest is available via the designated parking lot on Mt. Aetna Road near the bridge across the Savage River.

Phased reopening: Savage Highlands will reopen through a phased, stewardship-first approach beginning in late summer 2026. Initial access will be controlled and event-based, with guided experiences and priority trails highlighted. Limited overnight opportunities (select yurts/cabins and newly developed backcountry campsites) will be introduced as readiness allows, with broader day-use access and additional lodging phased in as safety, staffing, and infrastructure benchmarks are met.

Families & Kids: Under state ownership, children and families can finally experience this property together. That’s an important shift from its private past and a reflection of what public land is supposed to be.”

As I read these descriptives, several questions came to mind. I hope DNR can fully answer these to the satisfaction of the tax-paying public.

First, if the former Savage River Lodge was such a “premier recreational facility,” why is it taking so long to transition it into a state park?

Second, what exactly does DNR mean by a phased, stewardship-first approach? How long will these phases take? What are the exact stewardship parameters that DNR will follow in opening the park for full public use? What is the time frame and how much will all this cost?

Third, if the initial opening of the park is to be controlled and event-based what will be the measures of control and the types of events that will be permitted?

Four, why will initial access be limited to guided experiences with priority trails highlighted. Can it be that DNR is intent on controlling the narrative and exposure of the public to this new state park?

Five, in the Phased Reopening section of the website, is DNR telling us that the facility is not ready, not safe, not properly staffed, nor is its infrastructure sufficient to support the normal day use or overnight use that other state parks support? This is an important question that DNR needs to answer, given the agency was willing to spend $8.7 million on this property and has invested untold amounts of manhours and dollars in a park that seems to offer only marginal public access in the near future.

Six, we must question how DNR can declare “Under state ownership, children and families can finally experience this property together. That’s an important shift from its private past and a reflection of what public land is supposed to be.”

The public’s use of this area has in no way improved under DNR’s ownership. DNR’s has only demonstrated its inability to properly handle acquisition funds, let alone plan, budget, and staff its new facilities. Instead of providing us access to the park we are simply given “word salads” with no real substance.

Mike Gregory is from Grantsville.