DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological and Water Quality Study of the Lower Muskingum

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological and Water Quality Study of the Lower Muskingum Biological and Water Quality Study of the Lower Muskingum River Tributaries, 2012-2014 (Rokeby Lock to the Ohio River) Morgan, Muskingum, Noble, and Washington Counties OHIO EPA Technical Report EAS/2015-03-01 Division of Surface Water Ecological Assessment Section December 08, 2016 EAS/2015-03-01 Lower Muskingum River Tributaries 2012-2014 December 08, 2016 Biological and Water Quality Study of the Lower Muskingum River Tributaries (Rokeby Lock to the Ohio River) Morgan, Muskingum, Noble, and Washington Counties December 08, 2016 Ohio EPA Report DSW/EAS 2015-03-01 Prepared by State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Ecological Assessment Section 4675 Homer Ohio Lane Groveport, Ohio 43125 Division of Surface Water Lazarus Government Center 50 West Town Street, Suite 700 P.O. Box 1049 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 Southeast District Office 2195 Front Street Logan, Ohio 43138 John R. Kasich, Governor Craig W. Butler, Director State of Ohio Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 0 EAS/2015-03-01 Lower Muskingum River Tributaries 2012-2014 December 08, 2016 Table of Contents Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Table of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 21 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 26 Study Area Description ............................................................................................................................... 32 Location and Scope ................................................................................................................................. 32 Beneficial Uses ........................................................................................................................................ 32 Ecoregions, Geology, and Soils ............................................................................................................... 32 Land Cover and Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 34 Land Cover .......................................................................................................................................... 34 Land Use .............................................................................................................................................. 35 Ground Water Supply ......................................................................................................................... 35 Watershed Groups .............................................................................................................................. 36 Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 36 Recreation Use ........................................................................................................................................ 36 Sediment ................................................................................................................................................. 40 Point Source and Non-Point Source Impacts .......................................................................................... 43 Electric Generating Stations ................................................................................................................ 45 Landfills ............................................................................................................................................... 45 Waste Water Treatment ..................................................................................................................... 46 General NPDES Permits ....................................................................................................................... 47 Water Chemistry ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Grab Samples ...................................................................................................................................... 48 Water Quality Sonde Exceedance Summary ...................................................................................... 52 Trophic Evaluation .............................................................................................................................. 58 Stream Physical Habitat .......................................................................................................................... 64 1 EAS/2015-03-01 Lower Muskingum River Tributaries 2012-2014 December 08, 2016 Meigs Creek Watershed ...................................................................................................................... 64 Olive Green Creek Watershed ............................................................................................................ 64 West Branch Wolf Creek Watershed .................................................................................................. 65 South Branch Wolf Creek Watershed ................................................................................................. 66 Direct Muskingum River Tributaries ................................................................................................... 67 Fish Community ...................................................................................................................................... 71 Meigs Creek Watershed ...................................................................................................................... 71 Olive Green Creek Watershed ............................................................................................................ 73 West Branch Wolf Creek Watershed .................................................................................................. 74 South Branch Wolf Creek Watershed ................................................................................................. 75 Direct Muskingum River Tributaries ................................................................................................... 76 Cold-Water Streams ............................................................................................................................ 77 Macroinvertebrate Community .............................................................................................................. 83 Meigs Creek Watershed ...................................................................................................................... 83 Olive Green Creek Watershed .......................................................................................................... 101 Wolf Creek Watershed ...................................................................................................................... 107 Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................................... 128 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................... 129 Table of Figures Figure 1. 84% of the sites sampled in the lower Muskingum River tributaries study area met their designated aquatic life use biocriteria. ......................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2. QHEI scores were generally good to excellent in the lower Muskingum River Tributaries survey area, 2012-2014. ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 3. Sampling locations for the 2012-2014 lower Muskingum River tributaries survey area. Site numbers are identified in Table 3. .............................................................................................................. 27 Figure 4. The Monongahela Transition Zone and Permian Hills subecoregions constituted the majority of the lower Muskingum River tributaries survey area. ................................................................................. 33 Figure 5. The lower Muskingum River tributaries survey area was very rural, with 60.3 % being forested and 21.6% crops or pasture. ....................................................................................................................... 34 2 EAS/2015-03-01 Lower Muskingum River Tributaries 2012-2014 December 08, 2016 Figure 6. Active NPDES permitted facilities and other industrial activities in the lower Muskingum River tributaries watershed. Horizontal arrows indicate the direction and length of the directional well boring. Surface-mined areas are shaded tan. ......................................................................................................... 44 Figure 7. Graph of 2012 and 2013 average daily stream flow relative to the daily median
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FLOOD of AUGUST 1935 Dtf MUSKINGUM RIVER Z < 5
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Harold L. Ickes, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. C. Mendenhall, Director Water-Supply Paper 869 FLOOD OF AUGUST 1935 dtf MUSKINGUM RIVER o O z < 5 BY i ;> ^, C. V. YOUNGQUIST AND W. B. WITH SECTIONS ON THE ASSOCIATES METEOROLOGY AND HYDROLOOT ^ ;j . » BY * V WALDO E. SMITH AND A. K. SHOWALTEK 2. Prepared in cooperation with the * ^* FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRAflCg^ OF PUBLIC WORKS ' -o j; UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1941 jFor sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. G. - * * « Price 40 cents (paper) CONTENTS Pag« Abstract---.--_-_-__-__-___--______.-__-_---_---_-__-_--_-__-.-_._ I Introduction.______________________________________________________ 1 Administration and personnel---_______--_-_____-__--____________-__ 3 Acknowledgments ________-________-----_--__--__-_________________ 3 Geography _ ____________________________________________________ 6 Topography, drainage, and transportation________________________ 6 Rainfall...--_---.-__-------.-_--------__..---_-----------_---- 7 Population, industry, and mineral resources_---_-__--_________--__ 8 Flood control-___-_-___-__-_-__-____-_--_-_-__--_--__.____--_- S General features of the flood-_______________________________________ 9 Damage.-__-_______--____-__--__--__-_-____--_______-____--__ IT Meteorologic and hydrologic conditions, by Waldo E. Smith____________ 19 General features of the storm.___-____-__________---_____--__--_ 19 Records of precipitation._______________________________________ 21 Antecedent
    [Show full text]
  • Ground Water Pollution Potential of Washington County, Ohio
    GROUND WATER POLLUTION POTENTIAL OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OHIO BY MICHAEL P. ANGLE, JOSH JONAK, AND DAVE WALKER GROUND WATER POLLUTION POTENTIAL REPORT NO. 55 OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WATER WATER RESOURCES SECTION 2002 ABSTRACT A ground water pollution potential map of Washington County has been prepared using the DRASTIC mapping process. The DRASTIC system consists of two major elements: the designation of mappable units, termed hydrogeologic settings, and the superposition of a relative rating system for pollution potential. Hydrogeologic settings incorporate hydrogeologic factors that control ground water movement and occurrence including depth to water, net recharge, aquifer media, soil media, topography, impact of the vadose zone media, and hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer. These factors, which form the acronym DRASTIC, are incorporated into a relative ranking scheme that uses a combination of weights and ratings to produce a numerical value called the ground water pollution potential index. Hydrogeologic settings are combined with the pollution potential indexes to create units that can be graphically displayed on a map. Ground water pollution potential analysis in Washington County resulted in a map with symbols and colors, which illustrate areas of varying ground water pollution potential indexes ranging from 56 to 187. Washington County lies within the Nonglaciated Central hydrogeologic setting. The buried valley underlying the present Muskingum River and Ohio River basins contain sand and gravel outwash which are capable of yielding up to 500 gallons per minute (gpm) from properly designed, large diameter wells. Smaller tributaries contain only thin, fine-grained alluvial/lacustrine deposits commonly yielding less than 5 gpm.
    [Show full text]
  • POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution
    POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CAMPAIGN 273 POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS Series editor Marcus Cowper © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 The strategic situation The Appalachian frontier The Ohio Indians Lord Dunmore’s Virginia CHRONOLOGY 17 OPPOSING COMMANDERS 20 Virginia commanders Indian commanders OPPOSING ARMIES 25 Virginian forces Indian forces Orders of battle OPPOSING PLANS 34 Virginian plans Indian plans THE CAMPAIGN AND BATTLE 38 From Baker’s trading post to Wakatomica From Wakatomica to Point Pleasant The battle of Point Pleasant From Point Pleasant to Fort Gower THE AFTERMATH 89 THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY 93 FURTHER READING 94 INDEX 95 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com 4 British North America in1774 British North NEWFOUNDLAND Lake Superior Quebec QUEBEC ISLAND OF NOVA ST JOHN SCOTIA Montreal Fort Michilimackinac Lake St Lawrence River MASSACHUSETTS Huron Lake Lake Ontario NEW Michigan Fort Niagara HAMPSHIRE Fort Detroit Lake Erie NEW YORK Boston MASSACHUSETTS RHODE ISLAND PENNSYLVANIA New York CONNECTICUT Philadelphia Pittsburgh NEW JERSEY MARYLAND Point Pleasant DELAWARE N St Louis Ohio River VANDALIA KENTUCKY Williamsburg LOUISIANA VIRGINIA ATLANTIC OCEAN NORTH CAROLINA Forts Cities and towns SOUTH Mississippi River CAROLINA Battlefields GEORGIA Political boundary Proposed or disputed area boundary
    [Show full text]
  • August 7, 2020 Chairman Sam Randazzo Ohio Power Siting Board
    American Electric Power 1 Riverside Plaza Columbus, OH 43215-2373 Legal Department AEP.com August 7, 2020 Chairman Sam Randazzo Ohio Power Siting Board 180 East Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43215-3979 Ohio Power Siting Board Docketing Division Tanner Wolffram 180 East Broad Street Christen M. Blend Columbus, Ohio 43215-3979 Senior Counsel – Regulatory Services (614) 716-2914 (P) Re: Case No. 20-1279-EL-BTA (614) 716-1915 (P) In the Matter of the Amendment Application of AEP Ohio Transmission Company, [email protected] m Inc. for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need for the Rouse- [email protected] Bell Ridge 138 kV Transmission Line Project Dear Chairman Randazzo: Attached, please find a copy of the Amendment Application of AEP Ohio Transmission Company, Inc. for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need (“Application”) for the above-referenced project. This filing is made pursuant to O.A.C. 4906-5-01, et seq., and 4906-2-01, et seq. Filing of this Application is effected electronically pursuant to O.A.C. 4906-2-02 (A) and (D). Five printed copies and ten additional electronic copies (CDs) of this filing will also be submitted to the Staff of the Ohio Power Siting Board for its use. The following information is included pursuant to O.A.C. 4906-2-04(A)(3): (a) Applicant: AEP Ohio Transmission Company, Inc. c/o American Electric Power Energy Transmission 8600 Smiths Mill Road New Albany, Ohio 43054 (b) Facilities to be Certified: Rouse-Bell Ridge 138 kV Transmission Line Project (c) Applicant’s Authorized Representative with respect to this Application: Matthew L.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods of August and September 2004 in Eastern Ohio: FEMA Disaster Declaration 1556
    Floods of August and September 2004 in Eastern Ohio: FEMA Disaster Declaration 1556 By Andrew D. Ebner, David E. Straub, and Jonathan D. Lageman In cooperation with the Ohio Emergency Management Agency Open-File Report 2008–1291 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2008 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Ebner, A.D., Straub, D.E., and Lageman, J.D., 2008, Floods of August and September 2004 in eastern Ohio— FEMA Disaster Declaration 1556: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1291, 104 p. iii Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Along the Ohio Trail
    Along The Ohio Trail A Short History of Ohio Lands Dear Ohioan, Meet Simon, your trail guide through Ohio’s history! As the 17th state in the Union, Ohio has a unique history that I hope you will find interesting and worth exploring. As you read Along the Ohio Trail, you will learn about Ohio’s geography, what the first Ohioan’s were like, how Ohio was discovered, and other fun facts that made Ohio the place you call home. Enjoy the adventure in learning more about our great state! Sincerely, Keith Faber Ohio Auditor of State Along the Ohio Trail Table of Contents page Ohio Geography . .1 Prehistoric Ohio . .8 Native Americans, Explorers, and Traders . .17 Ohio Land Claims 1770-1785 . .27 The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 . .37 Settling the Ohio Lands 1787-1800 . .42 Ohio Statehood 1800-1812 . .61 Ohio and the Nation 1800-1900 . .73 Ohio’s Lands Today . .81 The Origin of Ohio’s County Names . .82 Bibliography . .85 Glossary . .86 Additional Reading . .88 Did you know that Ohio is Hi! I’m Simon and almost the same distance I’ll be your trail across as it is up and down guide as we learn (about 200 miles)? Our about the land we call Ohio. state is shaped in an unusual way. Some people think it looks like a flag waving in the wind. Others say it looks like a heart. The shape is mostly caused by the Ohio River on the east and south and Lake Erie in the north. It is the 35th largest state in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks & Greenspace
    2020 MUSKINGUM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Compiled by: Muskingum County Planning Commission Parks & Greenspace Report Parks & Greenspace Task Force Abstract State parks, forests, nature preserves, scenic waterways, and wildlife areas cover over 34,164 acres of land in Muskingum County. These assets contribute to the county’s tourism industry, which generates over $223,000,000 in annual sales revenue. Recreation contributes $15,000,000 to the local economy annually. Introduction Muskingum County is blessed with an abundance of green spaces. It is the 4th largest county in Ohio with a land mass of 664.6 square miles. Despite its size, the county is sparsely populated having around 86,000 residents. Just over 10% of the county’s land mass was listed as developed during the last census. In contrast, forests cover close to 55% of the land mass, and agriculture occupies just over 30%. The remainder of the county is dotted with scrub/shrub grasslands, wetlands, and open water (see Appendix A). State parks, forests, nature preserves, scenic waterways, and wildlife areas (see Appendix B for a detailed list) cover over 34,164 acres of land in Muskingum County. These assets contribute to the county’s tourism industry, which generates over $223,000,000 in annual sales revenue. Recreation contributes $15,000,000 to the local economy annually. Methodology Muskingum County residents actively participate in outdoor recreation. Understanding the vision of the public for Muskingum County Parks and Green Spaces is paramount. After all, the public is the owner of its community. The Parks and Green Spaces planning process began with a S.W.O.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Kids Hiking (Gnome Hikes)
    Enter to win a RTA Silipint! Take a Photo and post it with #rtafest—DRawings Every week Kids Hiking (Gnome Hikes) Kroger Wetlands (.6 mile or 1 mile with spur) = Beginner Friendly Behind the Marietta Kroger, Gnomes are said to be hiding in a beautiful wetland area. While hunting for these gnomes you’ll see many types of vegetation & possibly some wildlife while never leaving the city. This is a beginner friendly hike and you have the option to complete the main loop which is about .6 miles total or adding the spur trail (out and back) to make it a 1 mile hike. Be sure to bring bug spray to put on yourself and watch for poison ivy on the sides of the trail. Broughtons Orange Trail (3 miles) = Intermediate A beautiful trail in the Broughton Nature & Wildlife area where Gnomes have migrated to over the years. This trail is about 3 miles long and will be more of a challenge than the Kroger Wetlands. You’ll go up and down twisting through the woods as you search for gnomes that have decided these woods are the perfect place to live. This hike is a lollipop where you will start on a small spur, choose to go either right or left and follow the loop back to the small spur which will then take you back to the parking areas. We’d like to thank Sara Rosenstock for building the Gnomes and the campers at the Betsy Mills Club for painting them—they look amazing! Have Fun and Be Safe! Stay on marked trail The Rivers, Trails & Ales Festival has organized these events for your pleasure.
    [Show full text]
  • Monroe Report V1
    GROUND WATER POLLUTION POTENTIAL OF MONROE COUNTY, OHIO BY KATHY SPROWLS GROUND WATER POLLUTION POTENTIAL REPORT NO. 78 OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 2016 ABSTRACT A ground water pollution potential map of Monroe County has been prepared using the DRASTIC mapping process. The DRASTIC system consists of two major elements: the designation of mappable units, termed hydrogeologic settings, and the superposition of a relative rating system for pollution potential. Hydrogeologic settings form the basis of the system and incorporate the major hydrogeologic factors that affect and control ground water movement and occurrence including depth to water, net recharge, aquifer media, soil media, topography, impact of the vadose zone media, and hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer. These factors, which form the acronym DRASTIC, are incorporated into a relative ranking scheme that uses a combination of weights and ratings to produce a numerical value called the ground water pollution potential index. Hydrogeologic settings are combined with the pollution potential indexes to create units that can be graphically displayed on a map. Ground water pollution potential analysis in Monroe County resulted in a map with symbols and colors that illustrate areas of varying ground water contamination vulnerability. Three hydrogeologic settings were identified in Monroe County with computed ground water pollution potential indexes ranging from 63 to 179. Monroe County lies within the Nonglaciated Central hydrogeologic setting. Yields of up to 10 gallons per minute (gpm) are obtained from wells drilled in fill along stream valleys consisting of clay with occasional thin lenses of sand and gravel. Wells drilled into the sand and gravel deposits along the Ohio River can yield up to several hundred gallons per minute.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Biological and Water Quality Report - Wills
    Division of Surface Water June 2019 TMDL DEVELOPMENT | Draft Biological and Water Quality Report - Wills Creek and Selected Tributaries, 2014 In 2014, Ohio EPA conducted a biological and water quality survey in the Wills Creek watershed. This fact sheet summarizes the findings detailed in the biological and water quality report (BWQR). Report Highlights Wills Creek mainstem has experienced impressive reestablishment of warmwater habitat (WWH) communities and improved habitat scores since Ohio EPA’s 1984 and 1994 water quality surveys. In 1994, Ohio EPA conducted a biological and water quality study of the Wills Creek mainstem at 17 locations. At that time, only one location near the mouth was in full attainment of the WWH aquatic life use. Of the 13 biological samples assessed in 2014, nine (69 Figure 1. Sampling locations in the Wills Creek survey largely percent) were fully meeting the WWH aquatic life use and met their existing or recommended aquatic life use four (31 percent) were in partial attainment. Only one mainstem location was meeting for fish in 1994 but in 2014, 10 of the 13 sites sampled met the WWH biocritieria. In the 2014 survey, only one location did not meet for the aquatic insects because of flow alteration from a lowhead dam. The other locations sampled for macroinvertebrates were marginally good to exceptional and showed a major improvement in the number of EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) and sensitive taxa compared to the 1984 and 1994 surveys. Habitat dramatically improved with an average QHEI score of 62.1. A total of 45 Wills Creek tributaries were sampled at 68 locations with 42 (62 percent) in full attainment, 21 (31 Stakeholder Input percent) in partial attainment and five (7 percent) in non- The Agency is releasing the results from Wills Creek attainment of the assigned aquatic life use.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio 1654-1843
    Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio 1654-1843 Ohio Historical Society www.ohiohistory.org $4.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS Historical Background 03 Trails and Settlements 03 Shelters and Dwellings 04 Clothing and Dress 07 Arts and Crafts 08 Religions 09 Medicine 10 Agriculture, Hunting, and Fishing 11 The Fur Trade 12 Five Major Tribes of Ohio 13 Adapting Each Other’s Ways 16 Removal of the American Indian 18 Ohio Historical Society Indian Sites 20 Ohio Historical Marker Sites 20 Timeline 32 Glossary 36 The Ohio Historical Society 1982 Velma Avenue Columbus, OH 43211 2 Ohio Historical Society www.ohiohistory.org Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In Ohio, the last of the prehistoric Indians, the Erie and the Fort Ancient people, were destroyed or driven away by the Iroquois about 1655. Some ethnologists believe the Shawnee descended from the Fort Ancient people. The Shawnees were wanderers, who lived in many places in the south. They became associated closely with the Delaware in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Able fighters, the Shawnees stubbornly resisted white pressures until the Treaty of Greene Ville in 1795. At the time of the arrival of the European explorers on the shores of the North American continent, the American Indians were living in a network of highly developed cultures. Each group lived in similar housing, wore similar clothing, ate similar food, and enjoyed similar tribal life. In the geographical northeastern part of North America, the principal American Indian tribes were: Abittibi, Abenaki, Algonquin, Beothuk, Cayuga, Chippewa, Delaware, Eastern Cree, Erie, Forest Potawatomi, Huron, Iroquois, Illinois, Kickapoo, Mohicans, Maliseet, Massachusetts, Menominee, Miami, Micmac, Mississauga, Mohawk, Montagnais, Munsee, Muskekowug, Nanticoke, Narragansett, Naskapi, Neutral, Nipissing, Ojibwa, Oneida, Onondaga, Ottawa, Passamaquoddy, Penobscot, Peoria, Pequot, Piankashaw, Prairie Potawatomi, Sauk-Fox, Seneca, Susquehanna, Swamp-Cree, Tuscarora, Winnebago, and Wyandot.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthur Taggart Founder of the Catholic Community at Stockport
    Vol. XXXVI, No. 7 July, 2011 Arthur Taggart Founder of the Catholic Community at Stockport Arthur Taggart was an Irish Catholic immigrant, materials and they tried unsuccessfully to win the a road, dam, and canal contractor, and was the approval of payments in Congress in 1834 and inspiration for the early Catholic mission at 1836.4 But in 1836 the Ohio legislature passed an Stockport. He was born about 1802 near Drumquin act for Taggart’s relief, giving him $366.25 for quarry in western County Tyrone, Ireland, son of Patrick privileges and materials furnished by him on the Taggart. About 1820 he left Ireland with his sister, National Road.5 Mrs. Patrick McAleer, and her husband, and settled Late in 1832 Taggart was awarded a state at Little York, Pa. McAleer was a merchant and contract for procuring, quarrying, breaking, and hotel keeper.1 Another sister, Mrs. McDermott, delivering limestone from Canton to Zanesville for lived in the same vicinity in Pennsylvania. repairs to the National Road. Again he was not paid, From Little York, Taggart walked to Pittsburgh but in 1839 another act of the Ohio legislature allowed and then moved on to Wheeling. There he became him to sue the State.6 a contractor on the National Road. “The contracts On March 14, 1833 Arthur Taggart sold to the had been taken too low and the contractors generally Literary Society of St. Joseph inlot 32 on the National were not able to execute their contracts and Road in Norwich, for $1.00. A church was abandoned them without paying the laborers.
    [Show full text]