We Made Decisions Here Once

The beginnings of the Nature Park
The Memorial Gardens are surrounded by ca. 4,500 dunams (450 ha) of nature. There you can ride your bike, walk the various trails, visit archaeological sites or go for a dip in the spring. It seems as if the Nature Park has always been like this, waiting for hikers, visitors and the herd of cows who graze in the spring. But the truth is that the park carries a history of decisions that turned it into the park we are familiar with today.

The Memorial Gardens are surrounded by ca. 4,500 dunams (450 ha) of nature.

What was here?

Ramat Hanadiv was established on land that is owned privately by Yad Hanadiv and was dedicated to the commemoration of the memory of Baron Rothschild. The Society for Protection of Nature in Israel (SPNI) approach Yad Hanadiv and together they asked themselves what would be the right thing to do with the large area surrounding the Memorial Gardens.

In those days, 1984, a young ecologist by the name of Avi Perevolotsky finished his PhD and was fortunate to join the committee discussing this unique, historical issue with the question: what will be the purpose of the land and how will it serve the public?

‘I came to an unfamiliar place and I had to decide what were the main issues to examine in order to understand how the park could be more attractive for the public’, say Avi, ‘I was part of the first planning committee that included representatives of the SPNI (including me), an archaeologist, a forester, and representatives of Yad Hanadiv and Ramat Hanadiv.

As a committee, we made an important strategic decision that the land would be used for the benefit of the public while protecting its natural and landscape assets. This decision can still be felt today. To implement it, we set up a system of circular hiking trails that begins and ends at the carpark. Similarly, we decided that the trails would incorporate the archaeological sites where excavations were just beginning’.

We made an important strategic decision that the land would be used for the benefit of the public while protecting its natural and landscape assets

Deciding to dig

In the current location of Zur Spring, the aqueduct, the fruit tree grove and the Roman bath-house, was a great hill topped with a blackberry shrub. The presence of the shrub hinted at a source of water but there was no overland water flow. A decision was made to begin archaeological excavations – digging was conducted only during the summer, and already during the first season many exciting findings were discovered. As Avi relates: ‘One season they found the spring, and we waited an entire year in anticipation of the next discovery; then in the second season they found the entrance to the aqueduct, and then the pool was discovered, and the next season they found the entrance to the bath-house… and son on; all this beauty was revealed over ten years’.

At a certain point, coins were discovered; these coins matched the historical sources regarding the presence of a pool and its use as a “wishing well” – people threw coins in and made a wish. The coins also provided proof of the presence of the pool which was discovered later on.

One season they found the spring, then in the second season they found the entrance to the aqueduct, and then the pool was discovered, and the next season they found the entrance to the bath-house… and son on; all this beauty was revealed over ten years

an ancient Roman irrigation pond

Deciding to rehabilitate

Following the excavations it was time to rehabilitate and restore

The ancient historical context of the spring proved that it was used for agriculture. The archaeology was very unique – an ancient Roman irrigation pond, an ancient bath-house (bath-houses were usually in palaces and did not belong to small communities, while this bath-house was different and unique). Many resources were invested in rehabilitation and in establishing, next to the pool and the bath house, a grove of fruit trees, a vegetable garden for growing tomatoes (does not exist now) and later on an aquatic habitat that actually served to “resurrect” a landscape that looked natural but was actually completely man-made.

An ideological discussion arose around whether to restore the entire house with its two storeys – should we be modest in order to preserve the landscape of Mt. Carmel or should we be faithful to history and reconstruct the house in all its original glory?

Horvat ‘Aqev’

Choosing between landscape and history

‘One of the decisions engrained in my memory more than all the others’, relates Avi, ‘was the decision to restore Horvat ‘Aqev’. At Horvat ‘Aqev, mastic shrubs blocked the underlying layers. After the site was cleaned by archaeologists we started to discover Horvat ‘Aqev. And indeed, they dug year after year… it took a few years to understand the “site map” and its historical role; they found a site with one or two layers of stones. The walls were missing and the need for restoration arose, and then a discussion began about how to restore and reconstruct the site. The archaeologists realised that this was a two-storey farm-house. The first storey contained service areas, a stable and storehouses, and the top storey was residential. An ideological discussion arose around whether to restore the entire house with its two storeys – should we be modest in order to preserve the landscape of Mt. Carmel or should we be faithful to history and reconstruct the house in all its original glory?

‘In those days (and today too), there was no construction along the cliff edge from Zichron to Binyamina. The committee members stood facing the cliff at Ma’agan Micha’el, next to the field school, looking at the cliff and arguing, “one storey or two storeys?”’

That year the committee chairman was on sabbatical and Avi stepped in for him. ‘That was an ethical dilemma’, Avi emphasises, ‘with no right or wrong answer; there was a clash of values – landscape or restoration/history. We decided to retain one storey. Will you ask me today if it was the correct decision? I don’t know, that’s the power of decisions – you can always decide otherwise’.

We choose to present: Avi Perevolotsky

Role at Ramat Hanadiv: ecology, management and research consultant

How many years at Ramat Hanadiv? 38!

I chose to work at Ramat Hanadiv because: In the beginning it posed a fascinating professional challenge – how to set up and manage a park ecologically. But later I connected to the people and the spirit of the place as it developed and I enjoy working with the staff.

A decision made at Ramat Hanadiv that you remember well: Introducing the herd of cows to graze in the park in order to prevent fires. This required professional confidence and persuasion of various people while taking into consideration the range of interests and limitations.