DOCSLIB.ORG

Exit 29 Reuse Analysis and Feasibility Study Exit 29 Site Reuse Analysis and Feasibility Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Exit 29 Reuse Analysis and Feasibility Study Exit 29 Site Reuse Analysis and Feasibility Study Exit 29 Reuse Analysis and Feasibility Study Exit 29 Site Reuse Analysis and Feasibility Study Montgomery County Waterfront Advisory Committee Matthew L. Ossenfort, Montgomery County Executive Jeffrey Baker, Village of Canajoharie Mayor Ken Rose, MCWAC Chair, Economic Development Director Meghan M. Manion, Esq, Montgomery County Attorney Joseph Santangelo, Arkell Hall Foundation, Inc., President and CEO Janet Stanley, Village business owner of Lee’s Shops at Wagner Square John Peruzzi, Village business owner, Town of Canajoharie Councilor Alex Kuttesch, Montgomery County, Staff Assistant Jaime Reppert, NYS Department of State, Office of Planning & Development, Coastal Resource Specialist Josh Hunn, NYS Department of State, Office of Planning & Development, Coastal Resource Specialist Village of Canajoharie Board of Trustees Jeff Baker, Mayor John P. Snyder, Jr., Deputy Mayor William Jones, Trustee Harry Barse, Trustee Amy Monk, Trustee Andrea Hitchener, Village Clerk-Treasurer This project is being developed by the Montgomery County Local Waterfront Advisory Committee with funding by the New York State Department of State under Title 11 of the Environmental Protection Fund. The document was prepared by the following consultant team: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Community Engagement ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.1. Purpose and Approach ......................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Key Project Team Partners ................................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Community Engagement Principles ............................................................................................... 5 2.4 Community Involvement ..................................................................................................................... 5 3.0 Community Profile .................................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Community Background ...................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 Natural Resources .................................................................................................................................. 7 3.3 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................................. 8 3.4 Economic Resources ............................................................................................................................. 9 3.5 Demographics ....................................................................................................................................... 10 3.6 Housing .................................................................................................................................................... 11 3.7 Recreational Resources .................................................................................................................... 11 3.8 Community Services and Facilities .............................................................................................. 12 4.0 Site Reconnaissance ............................................................................................................................... 14 4.1 Project Boundary ................................................................................................................................. 14 4.2 Ownership of Lands ............................................................................................................................ 14 4.3 Structures Adjacent to Site .............................................................................................................. 15 4.4 Above and Below Ground Infrastructure .................................................................................. 16 4. 5 Transportation Systems ................................................................................................................... 16 4. 6 Adjacent Land and Water Uses ...................................................................................................... 18 4.7 Soil and Core Sampling ...................................................................................................................... 20 4.8 Topography and Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 20 4.9 View Corridors ...................................................................................................................................... 22 4.10 Current Zoning and Other Land Use Regulations ............................................................. 23 4.11 Environmental and Hazardous Materials and Abatement Status .............................. 28 4.12 Analysis of Site Constraints, Needs and Opportunities .................................................. 29 5.0 Workforce Development Center Feasibility Assessment ...................................................... 32 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 32 5.2 Industry Overview .............................................................................................................................. 32 5.3 Workforce Needs and Challenges ................................................................................................. 35 i 5.4 Workforce Training Participants .................................................................................................. 38 5.5 Existing Education and Training Programs ............................................................................. 39 5.5.1 Advanced Manufacturing and Distribution ................................................................ 39 5.5.2 Existing Education and Training Programs: Skilled Trades ............................... 42 5.6 Stakeholder Interviews ..................................................................................................................... 44 5.7 Comparable Workforce Training Centers ................................................................................. 46 5.8 Findings ................................................................................................................................................... 50 6.0 TARGET INDUSTRY ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 52 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 52 6.2 Industry Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 53 6.2.1 Focus on Manufacturing .......................................................................................................... 56 6.2.1.1 Location Quotients ............................................................................................................ 57 6.2.2 Industry Sectors and Building Space Needs ........................................................................ 60 6.2.3 Agriculture ......................................................................................................................................... 62 6.2.4 Regional Industry Clusters and Significant Industries ................................................... 63 6.3 Resource Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 67 6.3.1 Site Selection Criteria ................................................................................................................ 67 6.3.2 Labor Resources .......................................................................................................................... 68 6.3.3 Labor Costs .................................................................................................................................... 73 6.3.4 Educational Resources ............................................................................................................. 74 6.3.5 Transportation Access .............................................................................................................. 76 6.3.6 Real Estate ..................................................................................................................................... 77 6.3.7 Utilities ............................................................................................................................................ 79 6.3.8 Cost of Living ................................................................................................................................ 79 6.3.9 Housing ........................................................................................................................................... 79 6.3.10 Property Taxes ........................................................................................................................ 80 6.3.11 Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mohawk River Watershed – HUC-12
    ID Number Name of Mohawk Watershed 1 Switz Kill 2 Flat Creek 3 Headwaters West Creek 4 Kayaderosseras Creek 5 Little Schoharie Creek 6 Headwaters Mohawk River 7 Headwaters Cayadutta Creek 8 Lansing Kill 9 North Creek 10 Little West Kill 11 Irish Creek 12 Auries Creek 13 Panther Creek 14 Hinckley Reservoir 15 Nowadaga Creek 16 Wheelers Creek 17 Middle Canajoharie Creek 18 Honnedaga 19 Roberts Creek 20 Headwaters Otsquago Creek 21 Mill Creek 22 Lewis Creek 23 Upper East Canada Creek 24 Shakers Creek 25 King Creek 26 Crane Creek 27 South Chuctanunda Creek 28 Middle Sprite Creek 29 Crum Creek 30 Upper Canajoharie Creek 31 Manor Kill 32 Vly Brook 33 West Kill 34 Headwaters Batavia Kill 35 Headwaters Flat Creek 36 Sterling Creek 37 Lower Ninemile Creek 38 Moyer Creek 39 Sixmile Creek 40 Cincinnati Creek 41 Reall Creek 42 Fourmile Brook 43 Poentic Kill 44 Wilsey Creek 45 Lower East Canada Creek 46 Middle Ninemile Creek 47 Gooseberry Creek 48 Mother Creek 49 Mud Creek 50 North Chuctanunda Creek 51 Wharton Hollow Creek 52 Wells Creek 53 Sandsea Kill 54 Middle East Canada Creek 55 Beaver Brook 56 Ferguson Creek 57 West Creek 58 Fort Plain 59 Ox Kill 60 Huntersfield Creek 61 Platter Kill 62 Headwaters Oriskany Creek 63 West Kill 64 Headwaters South Branch West Canada Creek 65 Fly Creek 66 Headwaters Alplaus Kill 67 Punch Kill 68 Schenevus Creek 69 Deans Creek 70 Evas Kill 71 Cripplebush Creek 72 Zimmerman Creek 73 Big Brook 74 North Creek 75 Upper Ninemile Creek 76 Yatesville Creek 77 Concklin Brook 78 Peck Lake-Caroga Creek 79 Metcalf Brook 80 Indian
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of PCB Contamination on the Environment and the Cultural Integrity of the St
    University of Vermont UVM ScholarWorks Graduate College Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 2015 Effects of PCB Contamination on the Environment and the Cultural Integrity of the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe in the Mohawk Nation of Akwesasne Kim Ellen McRae University of Vermont Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis Part of the Environmental Studies Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, and the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons Recommended Citation McRae, Kim Ellen, "Effects of PCB Contamination on the Environment and the Cultural Integrity of the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe in the Mohawk Nation of Akwesasne" (2015). Graduate College Dissertations and Theses. 522. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/522 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at UVM ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate College Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of UVM ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EFFECTS OF PCB CONTAMINATION ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE CULTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE ST. REGIS MOHAWK TRIBE IN THE MOHAWK NATION OF AKWESASNE A Dissertation Presented by Kim McRae to The Faculty of the Graduate College of The University of Vermont In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Specializing in Natural Resources May, 2015 Defense Date: May, 2015 Thesis Committee: Saleem Ali, Ph.D., Advisor Cecilia Danks, Ph.D., Co-Advisor Susan Comerford, Ph.D., Chair Glenn McRae, Ph.D. Cynthia J. Forehand, Ph.D., Dean of Graduate College ABSTRACT The following research project examines the effects of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) on the environment and the cultural integrity of the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe Environment Division Environmental Assessment Form Project Name: St. Regis River Water Main Crossing P
    Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe Environment Division Environmental Assessment Form Project Name: St. Regis River Water Main Crossing Project Developer: Colleen Thomas, Director, Planning & Infrastructure Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe Project Coordinator: Rob Henhawk, Field Superintendant Brent Herne, Construction Manager Address: 2817 State Route 95 Akwesasne NY 13655 Phone Number: 1-518-358-4205 FAX Number: 1-518-358-5919 Other Contacts: Shawn Martin Manager, Public Works Aaron Jarvis, Tisdel Associates, Project Engineer 1 © Copyright 2007 St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, or its Licensors. All rights reserved. Introduction It is the tradition of the Mohawk People to look seven generations ahead in making decisions that affect the community. It is in this spirit that the Environmental Review Process has been developed. The resources available on the St. Regis Mohawk Reservation are limited and dwindling with each year that passes. It is the intention of this process to increase awareness of available resources and ensure that all consideration of these resources is taken when initiating a project. Focus and vigilance are required to make sure the seventh generation will have all that is necessary to maintain and continue our way of life. This community is unique and consists of cultural resources that have survived countless efforts to eliminate them and they are deserving of our protection and care. Development can proceed and remain in harmony with the cultural values passed on to us by our ancestors, but it requires forethought and effort. The land and resources should be considered as a gift to pass down to future generations, and as such it should remain as whole, intact, and healthy as it was received so that it may sustain them.
    [Show full text]
  • NYS Disaster Preparedness Commission
    New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission 2013 Annual Report Prepared by the NYS Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Services Office of Emergency Management March 31, 2014 Andrew M. Cuomo Governor Jerome M. Hauer Chairman TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 HIGHLIGHTS OF ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................................... 3 February 8–9: Winter Storm “Nemo” ....................................................................................................... 3 June-July: Severe Weather / Repetitive Storms ....................................................................................... 6 PROGRAM STATUS ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Grant Administration .............................................................................................................................. 12 Operations .............................................................................................................................................. 13 Incident Management Team Program ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Community Redevelopment Vision Former Beech-Nut Facility, Village of Canajoharie, Ny March 2018
    COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT VISION FORMER BEECH-NUT FACILITY, VILLAGE OF CANAJOHARIE, NY MARCH 2018 INTRODUCTION Site facts The former Beech-Nut facility sits in the heart of the Village of • 27 acres, 35 structures Canajoharie, a quaint town on the Mohawk River in New York. • Downtown Canajoharie, NY Imperial Packing Company started operations on the site in 1891. Imperial grew the business selling vacuum-packed hams • Access to I-90 Thruway, Route 10 and Route 5 using the adjacent Erie Canal, and the founders invested in the • Former food production facility Village as the industry grew. The facilities expanded rapidly • Located adjacent to the Mohawk River when Beech-Nut began producing a growing number of food products including chewing gum, coffee, baby food and more. For decades, Beech-Nut’s thriving operations provided jobs, community support, significant tax revenue and a sense of identity for the Village. Since the former Beech-Nut facility closed in 2010, the property has remained inactive and many of the 35 vacant buildings have fallen into disrepair. The Village and Montgomery County foreclosed on the property in 2017, creating the opportunity to begin visioning and planning for redevelopment of the iconic site encompassing 27 acres. During 2017, the EPA Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI) provided reuse planning assistance to engage the community in developing a redevelopment vision for the site. The SRI team has worked with Montgomery County Erie Canal and Beech-Nut factory ca. early 1900’s. and the Village of Canajoharie to facilitate reuse discussions with local stakeholders including the Village of Canajoharie administrators, the Exit 29 Task Force, the Montgomery County Executive office, and local business owners.
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Fishing: a Driver for Ecotourism
    New York FRESHWATER April 2019 FISHINGDigest Fishing: A Sport For Everyone NY Fishing 101 page 10 A Female's Guide to Fishing page 30 A summary of 2019–2020 regulations and useful information for New York anglers www.dec.ny.gov Message from the Governor Freshwater Fishing: A Driver for Ecotourism New York State is committed to increasing and supporting a wide array of ecotourism initiatives, including freshwater fishing. Our approach is simple—we are strengthening our commitment to protect New York State’s vast natural resources while seeking compelling ways for people to enjoy the great outdoors in a socially and environmentally responsible manner. The result is sustainable economic activity based on a sincere appreciation of our state’s natural resources and the values they provide. We invite New Yorkers and visitors alike to enjoy our high-quality water resources. New York is blessed with fisheries resources across the state. Every day, we manage and protect these fisheries with an eye to the future. To date, New York has made substantial investments in our fishing access sites to ensure that boaters and anglers have safe and well-maintained parking areas, access points, and boat launch sites. In addition, we are currently investing an additional $3.2 million in waterway access in 2019, including: • New or renovated boat launch sites on Cayuga, Oneida, and Otisco lakes • Upgrades to existing launch sites on Cranberry Lake, Delaware River, Lake Placid, Lake Champlain, Lake Ontario, Chautauqua Lake and Fourth Lake. New York continues to improve and modernize our fish hatcheries. As Governor, I have committed $17 million to hatchery improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Before Albany
    Before Albany THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Regents of the University ROBERT M. BENNETT, Chancellor, B.A., M.S. ...................................................... Tonawanda MERRYL H. TISCH, Vice Chancellor, B.A., M.A. Ed.D. ........................................ New York SAUL B. COHEN, B.A., M.A., Ph.D. ................................................................... New Rochelle JAMES C. DAWSON, A.A., B.A., M.S., Ph.D. ....................................................... Peru ANTHONY S. BOTTAR, B.A., J.D. ......................................................................... Syracuse GERALDINE D. CHAPEY, B.A., M.A., Ed.D. ......................................................... Belle Harbor ARNOLD B. GARDNER, B.A., LL.B. ...................................................................... Buffalo HARRY PHILLIPS, 3rd, B.A., M.S.F.S. ................................................................... Hartsdale JOSEPH E. BOWMAN,JR., B.A., M.L.S., M.A., M.Ed., Ed.D. ................................ Albany JAMES R. TALLON,JR., B.A., M.A. ...................................................................... Binghamton MILTON L. COFIELD, B.S., M.B.A., Ph.D. ........................................................... Rochester ROGER B. TILLES, B.A., J.D. ............................................................................... Great Neck KAREN BROOKS HOPKINS, B.A., M.F.A. ............................................................... Brooklyn NATALIE M. GOMEZ-VELEZ, B.A., J.D. ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Master Plan for Johnson Hall State Historic Site
    Master Plan for Johnson Hall State Historic Site City of Johnstown, Fulton County October 2020 Andrew M. Cuomo Governor Erik Kulleseid Commissioner 1 This page intentionally blank. 2 Acknowledgements The Johnson Hall State Historic Site Master Plan and Environmental Impact Statement are the result of a dedicated effort by many persons. In cooperation, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation worked with–and coordinated input from–the Friends of Johnson Hall, the New York Natural Heritage Program, and others, whose service to this Plan is of unparalleled value. The Agency wishes to acknowledge the time and effort of everyone who participated in the development of these documents. Erik Kulleseid Commissioner Tom Alworth Executive Deputy Commissioner Daniel Mackay Deputy Commissioner for Historic Preservation Alane BallChinian Regional Director, Saratoga-Capital Region Wade Wells Historic Site Manager Saratoga-Capital Regional Staff David Barone, Assistant Regional Director Casey Holzworth, Regional Biologist Kurt Kress, Assistant District Manager - Hudson Valley District Brian Strasavich, Regional Parks Manager State Historic Preservation Staff Travis M. Bowman, Historic Preservation Program Coordinator Dr. Andrew Farry, Archaeologist Christopher Flagg, Former Director for Bureau of Historic Sites Gregory Smith, Director for Bureau of Historic Sites Albany Staff Paige A. Barnum, AICP, Park Planner Sandy Burnell, Real Estate Specialist Diana Carter, Assistant Division Director for Planning Aileen Genett, Recreation
    [Show full text]
  • Post Office Box 1130, Cooperstown, NY 13326 · Tel: 607 547 8881 · Fax
    The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo Governor of New York State NYS State Capitol Building Albany, NY 12224 Joseph Martens, Commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker, Acting Commissioner NYS Department of Conservation NYS Department of Health 625 Broadway Corning Tower, Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12233-1011 Albany, NY 12237 March 24, 2015 RE: Brookman Corners Compressor Station Dear Governor Cuomo, DEC Commissioner Martens, and DOH Acting Commissioner Zucker: Otsego 2000 is extremely concerned with plans by Dominion Transmission Inc. (DTI) to expand its Brookman Corners compressor station in Montgomery County, which would expose families and children in the vicinity to high levels of pollutants dangerous to human health. (FERC Docket #CP14-497-000) Please see the attached information that we provided to NYS-DEC project manager, Chris Hogan, in a meeting with him and his staff on March 19, 2015. During that meeting we discussed errors and misrepresentations by DTI, including erroneous air dispersion modeling which neglects impacts to the Otsquago Valley and village of Fort Plain. However we also recommended several design and development improvements, described herein, that could significantly reduce those emission levels and other impacts to the valley, including Otsquago Creek. Otsego 2000 maintains that this relevant and factual information should be reviewed before agencies consider air and water resource permits for this project. Respectfully, our objective is to encourage dialogue and avoid circumstances that often result in litigation, resentment of industry, and disillusion with government agencies entrusted to protect the public. Our organization seeks to achieve positive solutions whenever possible, so we urge your active support and involvement to facilitate a better outcome in these proceedings.
    [Show full text]
  • Subwatershed Characterization
    Chapter 3: Subwatershed Assessment 3.1 Objective of the Assessment The structure of watersheds is dendritic or tree-like with smaller streams joining progressively larger ones (see Map 2-5). Thus, the watershed as a whole can be divided into a series of nested “subwatersheds” as illustrated by the HUC-8 through HUC-12 notation. Effective management of water quality in the basin as a whole depends on recognizing this fundamental structure of the watershed, starting with smaller units and addressing restoration and protection efforts to progressively larger, more inclusive ones. The objective, therefore, is to assess water- quality issues at their source, and to set priorities for remediating degraded parts of the watershed and protecting those that are not degraded but may be in danger of becoming so without effective management. Recommendations for addressing the restoration and protections issues uncovered in this assessment are discussed in Chapter 4. 3.2 Assessment Criteria and Procedure To complete this assessment, each of the 12-digit HUC subwatersheds in the Mohawk River Watershed was evaluated using a set of quantitative indicators for three aspects of watershed health: water quality, land use, and habitat. The evaluation assigned a score of 1 to 5 for each of various quantitative indicators (metrics) of watershed health. The scores associated with these metrics of watershed health were combined to a final score; some were weighted for overall significance. The amalgamated scores can be used to help define priority areas (subwatersheds with the lowest overall scores), while preserving important information regarding the underlying causes for concern. Quantitative indicators and resulting scores for the three aspects of watershed health are described in this section.
    [Show full text]
  • Streamflow Peaks of Record at US Geological Survey Streamgages
    Streamflow Peaks of Record at U.S. Geological Survey Streamgages Resulting from Hurricane Irene Rainfall (All Data Is Provisional and Subject to Change without notice) Provisional data: Subsequent review may result in significant revisions to the data. Data users are cautioned to consider carefully the provisional nature of the information before using it for decisions that concern personal or public safety or the conduct of business Abbreviations: [mi2, square miles; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; R, River; HWM, High Water Mark; NR, Near; BLW, Below; L, Lake; BR, Branch; W, West; C, Creek ] Peak Number of Peak Stream‐ Years of Stream‐ Date of Station Drainage Peak flow Date of Peak Flow flow Previous Number Station Name Area (mi^2) Stage (ft) (ft^3/s) Peak Record (ft^3/s) Peak Special Remarks 01483155 SILVER LAKE TRIBUTARY AT MIDDLETOWN, DE 2.0 4.64 270 8/27/2011 10 212 7/12/2004 01483700 ST JONES RIVER AT DOVER, DE 31.9 11.72 1,900 8/28/2011 53 1,900 9/13/1960 Streamflow affected to unknown degree by Regulation or Diversion 01484100 BEAVERDAM BRANCH AT HOUSTON , DE 303.0 5575.57 300 8/28/2011 53 163 12/9/2009 01169000 NORTH RIVER AT SHATTUCKVILLE, MA 89.0 17.66 53,100 8/28/2011 71 18,800 10/9/2005 01169900 SOUTH RIVER NEAR CONWAY, MA 24.1 13.73 12,700 8/28/2011 45 8,770 10/9/2005 01170000 DEERFIELD RIVER NEAR WEST DEERFIELD, MA 557 23.77 103,000 8/28/2011 71 61,700 4/5/1987 Streamflow affected by Regulation or Diversion 01170100 GREEN RIVER NEAR COLRAIN, MA 41.4 13.31 17,500 8/28/2011 44 6,540 10/9/2005 01171500 MILL RIVER AT NORTHAMPTON, MA 52.6 16.42 7,000 8/28/2011 73 6,300 8/19/1955 01181000 WEST BRANCH WESTFIELD RIVER AT HUNTINGTON, MA 94.0 16.94 35,000 8/28/2011 76 28,000 10/9/2005 Peak from HWM.
    [Show full text]
  • Butlers of the Mohawk Valley: Family Traditions and the Establishment of British Empire in Colonial New York
    Syracuse University SURFACE Dissertations - ALL SURFACE December 2015 Butlers of the Mohawk Valley: Family Traditions and the Establishment of British Empire in Colonial New York Judd David Olshan Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Olshan, Judd David, "Butlers of the Mohawk Valley: Family Traditions and the Establishment of British Empire in Colonial New York" (2015). Dissertations - ALL. 399. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/399 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract: Butlers of the Mohawk Valley: Family Traditions and the Establishment of British Empire in Colonial New York Historians follow those tributaries of early American history and trace their converging currents as best they may in an immeasurable river of human experience. The Butlers were part of those British imperial currents that washed over mid Atlantic America for the better part of the eighteenth century. In particular their experience reinforces those studies that recognize the impact that the Anglo-Irish experience had on the British Imperial ethos in America. Understanding this ethos is as crucial to understanding early America as is the Calvinist ethos of the Massachusetts Puritan or the Republican ethos of English Wiggery. We don't merely suppose the Butlers are part of this tradition because their story begins with Walter Butler, a British soldier of the Imperial Wars in America.
    [Show full text]