DOCSLIB.ORG

National Seashore I Mississippi

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Seashore I Mississippi I NATIONAL SEASHORE I MISSISSIPPI • ! ,, Prepared and published by the Denver Service Center FOREWORO This report has been prepared to provide the Service with the Administrative and Historical Data Sections for the Fort on Ship Island (Fort Massachusetts) Historic Structure Report. Raw data was ferreted out in Fiscal Year 1974 and made available to Architectural Historians John Garner and Fred Gjessing for evaluation and in the Architectural Data Section of the Historic Structure Report. Documentary data from which this report was prepared is found principally in Record Groups 77, 92, 156, and 393 at the National Archives, and Record· Group 77 at the East Point, Georgia, Records Center. On a field trip to Mississippi f the James Stevens Collection and manuscripts at the Mississippi Department of Archives and History were examined. These documents were culled to provide a structural history of the fort which will be of use to management and interpreters, as well as architects. Many persons have assisted in preparation of this report. At the Mississippi Unit, Gulf Islands National Seashore, Assistant Superintendent Noel J. Pachta and key members of his staff (William V. Westphal and Mike Brown) supported and encouraged our work. Besides providing transportation to the island, they cheerfully and promptly responded to our numerous questions. Park Chief of Interpretation Mary Jones, in cooperation with Regional and Denver Service Center programmers, secured funds for preparation of this report. Long-time friend and associate "Mr. History of the Gulf Coast/II Jim Stevens, and his lovely and gracious wife--went out of their way to make our field trip to Harrison County profitable and enjoyable. Mr. Stevens permitted unlimited access to his incomparable and well organized library on local history. Friends and associates at the National Archives: Dale Floyd, Mike Musick, John Matias, and Richard Cox of the Old Military Branch and Raymond Cotton and Mike Slanchie of the Center for Carlographic Architectural Archives diligently searched the stacks in response to our seemingly never ending requests and copied hundreds of documents and plans. At the East Point, Georgia, Record Center S.A. Rayden graciously handled my requests, a number of which were made by telephone. Architectural Historians John Garner and Henry Judd formerly of the National Park Service toured the fort, read the fabric, and made valuable suggestions as to what, in the way of documents, was required to facilitate their mission. By sharing their vast knowledge of the buildersl arts, they enabled us to understand better and explain details of the fortis structural history, especially those on which the documents were vague or silent. As always, in researching and preparing a study of a United States fort built under supervision of the Corps of Engineers, a debt is owed Dr. E. Raymond Lewis of Washington I D. C. I author of that outstanding introduction to the subject, Seacoast Fortifications ~ the United States, for sharing his encyclopedic knowledge of the subject. Collegues and associates--former Assistant Superintendent Noel Pachta of Gulf Islands National Seashore, Drs. Harry Pfanz and Harry Butowsky of the Washington Officels Cultural Resources Management; Jim Stevens, President of the Mississippi Historical Society; and John Garner, former Chief, Cultural Preservation Branch, Southeast Region, and Regional Historian Lenard Brown, Southeast Region--read the manuscript in draft and made valuable suggestions, saving us from future embarassments. Last, but by no means least, Darlene K. Geist, Alaska/Pacific Northwest/Western Team and Beverly A. Ritchey, Mid-Atlantic/North Atlantic Team, had the most challenging task of all--converting our scrawl into a typed manuscript. Edwin C. Bearss TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD I. ADMINISTRATIVE DATA A. Name and Number of Structure B. Proposed Use of Structure 1 C. Justification for Such Use as Shown in the Master Plan D. Provision for Operating Sturcture 1 E. Cooperative Agreement, if any I Executed or Proposed for Operating the Structure 1 F. Brief Description of 1975-76 Stabiization/Preservation Project G. Additional Work Required 4 II. THE 21-YEAR CAMPAIGN TO INCLUDE SHIP ISLAND IN THE NATION'S DEFENSE SCHEME 5 A. Board of Engineers and America's Third System of Coastal Defense 5 8. Corpsl Initial Study of the Feasibility of Fortifying Ship Island is Aborted 8 1. Difficulties with France and in Texas Cause Mississippians to Look to the Defense of the Gu If Coast 8 2. The Crisis Passes 9 3. The Chase Report 9 C. The Henderson Resolution and the Totten Report 11 D. Corps of Engineers Re-examines the Situtation 13 1. Annexation of Texas Causes Renewed Interest in a Ship Island Fort 13 2. Department Changes Its Position 13 3. Chase-Ogden-Barnard Study 14 4. President Polk1s August 30, 1847, Executive Order 16 E. Congress Funds Construction of a Ship Island Fort 16 1. Secretary of War Davis Supports the Proposal 16 2. The Mississippi Legislature1s Resolution of February 26, 1856 17 3. Congress Appropriates $100,000 17 F. The Leadbetter-Beauregard-Newton Study 17 1. The Mission 17 2. The Board1s Report 19 3. Totten Rejects the Report 20 G. The Thayer, De RussYI and Barnard Memoir 21 H. Secretary of War Floyd Approves the Project 23 III. LIEUTENANT ALEXANDER'S 11 MONTHS AS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER: NOVEMBER 1857-0CTOBER 1858 24 A. Alexanderls Background 24 8. He Receives His Instructions From Colonel Thayer 24 C Alexander Takes Post at Biloxi 26 O. Surveying and Mapping the Site 27 1. Project Secures a Boat 27 2. Two Ship Island Maps are Prepared and Submitted 28 E. Alexanderls Loose Interpretation of His Instructions Cause Grave Difficulties 28 1. Department Rules that Construction of Any Improvements is Illegal 28 2. Alexander Jumps the Gun 29 3. Department Questions His Judgment 29 4. Alexander Defends His Actions 30 F. Alexanderls Program for Fiscal Years 1859 and 1960 31 G. Project is Shut Down and the Public Property Secured 32 H. Alexander Seeks to Prepare Detailed Estimates and Plans 33 I. Plans and Estimates are Prepared and Submitted for a Temporary Wharf 33 J. Yellow Fever Cuts Down Lieutenant Alexander 35 IV. THE FORT TAKES SHAPE UNDER LIEUTENANT PRIME'S SUPERINTENDENCY: 1859-61 36 A. Prime Becomes Project Engineer 36 1. Mississippi Cedes Jurisdiction 36 2. Prime is Named Project Engineer 36 3. Prime Hires a Clerk and a Physician 38 B. Department Approves the Site 39 C. Planning and Programming with Lieutenant Prime 39 1. Prime Estimates the Cost of Completing the Fort 39 2. Prime Submits His Fiscal Year 1860 Program 48 3. The Department Approves the Program 49 D. Construction of the Wharf and Temporary Buildings 49 E. Prime Meets Several Inherited Administrative Challenges 50 1. Settling the Thompson Claim 50 2. Evicting a Trespasser 52 F. Prime Contracts for Materials 53 1. Jules Blanc Gets the Brick Contract 53 2. Department Opts for an Aggregate of Broken Bats 55 G. Work Accomplished in Fiscal Year 1859 56 H. Certain Details are Reviewed and Refined Preparatory to Breaking Ground 57 1. Department Rejects a Proposal for a Seawall to Protect the Site 57 2. Prime Asks for and Receives Guidance on Construction of the Gateway Scarp and Casemate Piers 58 I. Providing the Project with Embrasure I rons and Stones and Gun Pintles 59 1. Prime Takes an Extended' Furlough 59 2. Embrasure Irons and Stones are Decided upon and Ordered 60 3. The Embrasures for the Fortis Big Guns 61 a. Irons 61 b. Embrasure Stones 62 c. Embrasure Brickwork 62 4. For the Flanking Howitzers 62 a. Plans 62 b. Ironwork 63 c. Brickwork 63 5. Adjusting the Pintles to the Pintle Holes 64 J. Storms and Gales Plague the Project 65 K. The Coast Survey Studies the Tides 66 L. Fort Takes Shape: Fiscal Year 1860 Construction Program 67 1. The Program 67 2. Excavating for the Foundations, Pouring Concrete, and Laying-up Brickwork 67 3. Coping with Subsidence and Repairing the Damage 69 4. Condition of the Work on June 30, 1860 69 5. Division of Labor and Tasks Accomplished 70 M. Prime and the Department Agree on Several Details 71 1. Cistern Plans are Developed 71 2. Plans for the Drawbridge Pit are Submitted, Revised, and Approved 71 3. Guidelines for the Privies are Outlined 73 N Fiscal Year 1861 Program and Fiscal Year 1862 Estimates 74 1. Congress Appropriates $20,000 for Fiscal Year 1861 74 2. Prime Submits and Department Approves the Program 74 3. Prime Calls for an $85,000 Appropriation in Fiscal Year 1862 74 O. End of the Schooner IIBaker ll 75 P. Series of Gales Balters the Island and Alters Priorities 77 1. August 16, 1860, Storm 77 2. September 14-15 Killer Hurricane 78 3. October 1-2 Storm 79 4. November-December Work Program 79 5. Department Transmits a General Casemate Plan 80 6. Construction of a Parade Storehouse 80 Q. Sectional Strife and Secession Stop Construction 81 1. South Carolina Secedes from the Union 81 2. Lieutenant Prime Returns to Ship Island 82 3. Department Orders all Construction Stopped 83 4. Mississippians Seize the Fort 84 5. Work Accomplished by the lJnited States in Fiscal Year 1861 85 6. Mississippians Evacuate Ship Island 86 7. Department Stops the Fortis Armament 87 8. Prime Closes Down the Project and is Reassigned 87 V. CONSTRUCTION IS RESUMED UNDER LIEUTENANT PALFREY'S SUPERVISION 89 A. Palfrey Undertakes a Challenging Assignment 89 1. General Totten Selects a New Superintending Engineer 89 2. Department Provides Palfrey With Plans 89 3. Palfrey Calls for Additional Data 90 4. Department Provides Some Answers 91 (a) As To Stairways, Differences in Levels of Traverse Circles and Embrasure Soles, and Whereabouts of Shot Furnace 91 (b) Design and Location of Service Magazines is Deferred 91 (c) Department Calls for Plans for P,ivies 91 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ch 5 NC Legislature.Indd
    The State Legislature The General Assembly is the oldest governmental body in North Carolina. According to tradition, a “legislative assembly of free holders” met for the first time around 1666. No documentary proof, however, exists proving that this assembly actually met. Provisions for a representative assembly in Proprietary North Carolina can be traced to the Concessions and Agreements, adopted in 1665, which called for an unicameral body composed of the governor, his council and twelve delegates selected annually to sit as a legislature. This system of representation prevailed until 1670, when Albemarle County was divided into three precincts. Berkeley Precinct, Carteret Precinct and Shaftsbury Precinct were apparently each allowed five representatives. Around 1682, four new precincts were created from the original three as the colony’s population grew and the frontier moved westward. The new precincts were usually allotted two representatives, although some were granted more. Beginning with the Assembly of 1723, several of the larger, more important towns were allowed to elect their own representatives. Edenton was the first town granted this privilege, followed by Bath, New Bern, Wilmington, Brunswick, Halifax, Campbellton (Fayetteville), Salisbury, Hillsborough and Tarborough. Around 1735 Albemarle and Bath Counties were dissolved and the precincts became counties. The unicameral legislature continued until around 1697, when a bicameral form was adopted. The governor or chief executive at the time, and his council constituted the upper house. The lower house, the House of Burgesses, was composed of representatives elected from the colony’s various precincts. The lower house could adopt its own rules of procedure and elect its own speaker and other officers.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocm06220211.Pdf
    THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS--- : Foster F__urcO-lo, Governor METROP--�-��OLITAN DISTRICT COM MISSION; - PARKS DIVISION. HISTORY AND MASTER PLAN GEORGES ISLAND AND FORT WARREN 0 BOSTON HARBOR John E. Maloney, Commissioner Milton Cook Charles W. Greenough Associate Commissioners John Hill Charles J. McCarty Prepared By SHURCLIFF & MERRILL, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL CONSULTANT MINOR H. McLAIN . .. .' MAY 1960 , t :. � ,\ �:· !:'/,/ I , Lf; :: .. 1 1 " ' � : '• 600-3-60-927339 Publication of This Document Approved by Bernard Solomon. State Purchasing Agent Estimated cost per copy: $ 3.S2e « \ '< � <: .' '\' , � : 10 - r- /16/ /If( ��c..c��_c.� t � o� rJ 7;1,,,.._,03 � .i ?:,, r12··"- 4 ,-1. ' I" -po �� ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wish to acknowledge with thanks the assistance, information and interest extended by Region Five of the National Park Service; the Na­ tional Archives and Records Service; the Waterfront Committee of the Quincy-South Shore Chamber of Commerce; the Boston Chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy; Lieutenant Commander Preston Lincoln, USN, Curator of the Military Order of the Loyal Legion; Mr. Richard Parkhurst, former Chairman of Boston Port Authority; Brigardier General E. F. Periera, World War 11 Battery Commander at Fort Warren; Mr. Edward Rowe Snow, the noted historian; Mr. Hector Campbel I; the ABC Vending Company and the Wilson Line of Massachusetts. We also wish to thank Metropolitan District Commission Police Captain Daniel Connor and Capt. Andrew Sweeney for their assistance in providing transport to and from the Island. Reproductions of photographic materials are by George M. Cushing. COVER The cover shows Fort Warren and George's Island on January 2, 1958.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Coast Artillery Living History Fort
    Coast Artillery Living History Fort Hancock, NJ On 20-22 May 2016, the National Park Service (NPS) conducted the annual spring Coast Defense and Ocean Fun Day (sponsored by New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium – (http://njseagrant.org/) in conjunction with the Army Ground Forces Association (AGFA) and other historic and scientific organizations. Coast Defense Day showcases Fort Hancock’s rich military heritage thru tours and programs at various locations throughout the Sandy Hook peninsula – designated in 1982 as “The Fort Hancock and Sandy Hook Proving Ground National Historic Landmark”. AGFA concentrates its efforts at Battery Gunnison/New Peck, which from February to May 1943 was converted from a ‘disappearing’ battery to a barbette carriage gun battery. The members of AGFA who participated in the event were Doug Ciemniecki, Donna Cusano, Paul Cusano, Chris Egan, Francis Hayes, Doug Houck, Richard King, Henry and Mary Komorowski, Anne Lutkenhouse, Eric Meiselman, Tom Minton, Mike Murray, Kyle Schafer, Paul Taylor, Gary Weaver, Shawn Welch and Bill Winslow. AGFA guests included Paul Casalese, Erika Frederick, Larry Mihlon, Chris Moore, Grace Natsis, Steve Rossi and Anthony Valenti. The event had three major components: (1) the Harbor Defense Lantern Tour on Friday evening; (2) the Fort Hancock Historic Hike on Saturday afternoon and (3) Coastal Defense Day on Sunday, which focused on Battery Gunnison/New Peck operations in 1943, in conjunction with Ocean Fun Day. The educational objective was to provide interpretation of the Coast Artillery mission at Fort Hancock in the World War Two-era with a focus on the activation of two 6” rapid fire M1900 guns at New Battery Peck (formerly Battery Gunnison).
    [Show full text]
  • 6-Ingh Barbette . Carriage Model of 1910
    1073 1073 • SERVICE HANDBOOK_ OF THE 6-INGH BARBETTE . CARRIAGE MODEL OF 1910 FOR 6-INCH GU- NO MODEL OF 1908 Mu PREPARED IN THE OFFICE Of' THE CHIEF OF ORDNANCE May, 1923 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1922 1073 1073 SERVICE HANDBOOK OF THE 6-INCH BARBFYFFE CAR IAGH MODEL OF 1910 FOR 6-INCH GUNS MODEL OF 1908 Mil PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ORDNANCE May, 1921 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1922 WAR DEPARTMENT Document No. 1073 Office of The Adjutant General NOTE.-This document supersedes Ordnance Pamphlet No. 1713. WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, May 31,1921. The following publication, entitled "Service Handbook of the 6-inch Barbette Carriage, Model of 1910 for 6-inch Guns, Model of 1908 Mu," is published for the information and guidance of all concerned. • [062.1, A. G. O.] BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR: PEYTON C. MARCH, Major General, Chiqfof Staff: OFFICIAL: P. C. HARRIS, The Adjutant General. (3) TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page. 6 List of plates 7 General description 7 Emplacement 7 The carriage 7 Principal parts 7 Pedestal Pivot yoke 8 Cradle 9. Recoil and counterrecoil system 10 Gunner's platforms 10 Elevating mechanism 10 Range disk 11 Traversing mechanism 12 Sight 12 Shield and supports 12 Gas-ejector system 13 Electrical fittings, cables, and wiring 14 Lighting circuits 15 The firing circuits 15 Shot trucks 16 Shot barrows 16 Instructions for assembling the carriage 19 Care of the carriage Generalinstructions 19 Oil holes 19 20 To pack a stuffing box 20 Instructions for cleaning recoil cylinders 21 Approximate weight of principal parts of carriage 22 List of articles packed in armament chest List of parts 23 (5) LIST OF PLATES.
    [Show full text]
  • The Buffalo Soldiers Study, March 2019
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUFFALO SOLDIERS STUDY MARCH 2019 BUFFALO SOLDIERS STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The study explores the Buffalo Soldiers’ stewardship role in the early years of the national Legislation and Purpose park system and identifies NPS sites associated with the history of the Buffalo Soldiers and their The National Defense Authorization Act of 2015, post-Civil War military service. In this study, Public Law 113-291, authorized the Secretary of the term “stewardship” is defined as the total the Interior to conduct a study to examine: management of the parks that the US Army carried out, including the Buffalo Soldiers. “The role of the Buffalo Soldiers in the early Stewardship tasks comprised constructing and years of the national park system, including developing park features such as access roads an evaluation of appropriate ways to enhance and trails; performing regular maintenance historical research, education, interpretation, functions; undertaking law enforcement within and public awareness of the Buffalo Soldiers in park boundaries; and completing associated the national parks, including ways to link the administrative tasks, among other duties. To a story to the development of national parks and lesser extent, the study also identifies sites not African American military service following the managed by the National Park Service but still Civil War.” associated with the service of the Buffalo Soldiers. The geographic scope of the study is nationwide. To meet this purpose, the goals of this study are to • evaluate ways to increase public awareness Study Process and understanding of Buffalo Soldiers in the early history of the National Park Service; and The process of developing this study involved five phases, with each phase building on and refining • evaluate ways to enhance historical research, suggestions developed during the previous phase.
    [Show full text]
  • X VICINITY of 1St Robert Livingston STATE CODE COUNTY CODE Louisiana 22 St
    Form No. 10-300 REV. (9/77) bATA UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES i INVENTORY -- NOMINATION FORM SEE INSTRUCTIONS IN HOW TO COMPLETE NATIONAL REGISTER FORMS TYPE ALL ENTRIES -- COMPLETE APPLICABLE SECTIONS iNAME **- HISTORIC Fort Proctor AND/OR COMMON LOCATION STREET& NUMBER —NOT FOR PUBLICATION CITY, TOWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT Lia? fU- 4 . t -x_ VICINITY OF 1st Robert Livingston STATE CODE COUNTY CODE Louisiana 22 St. Bernard 087 *"" CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENT USE —DISTRICT —PUBLIC —OCCUPIED —AGRICULTURE —MUSEUM X-BUILDING(S) -^PRIVATE ^.UNOCCUPIED —COMMERCIAL —PARK —STRUCTURE —BOTH —WORK IN PROGRESS —EDUCATIONAL —PRIVATE RESIDENCE —SITE PUBLIC ACQUISITION ACCESSIBLE —ENTERTAINMENT —RELIGIOUS —OBJECT _IN PROCESS —YES: RESTRICTED —GOVERNMENT —SCIENTIFIC _XBEING CONSIDERED J^YES: UNRESTRICTED —INDUSTRIAL —TRANSPORTATION —NO —MILITARY _?OTHER: OWNER OF PROPERTY NAME Shell Beach Properties, Inc. J STREET& TOERSouth Carollton Avenue CITY. TOWN STATE New Orleans _ VICINITY OF Louisiana i i1 LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF DEEDS. ETC. St. Bernard Parish Courthouse STREET & NUMBER CITY. TOWN STATE Chalmette Louisiana 1 REPRESENTATION IN EXISTING SURVEYS TlYLE Louisiana Historic Sites Survey DATE 1978 —FEDERAL J^STATE —COUNTY _LOCAL DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS State Historic Preservation Office CITY. TOWN STATE Baton Rouge Louisiana DESCRIPTION CONDITION CHECK ONE CHECK ONE .EXCELLENT .^DETERIORATED .^UNALTERED ^ORIGINAL SITE .GOOD —RUINS —ALTERED —MOVED DATE. _FAIR _UNEXPOSED DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (IF KNOWN) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE The work (or fort) at Proctor's Landing was built on the southern shore of Lake Borgne along a road which ran beside Bayou Terre aux Boeufs. The road and the bayou were both major means of access to the city of New Orleans, and thus a potential invasion route.
    [Show full text]
  • Dry Tortugas Expedition Journal
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Dry Tortugas National Park Florida Dry Tortugas Expedition JOurnal 0 100 200 Feet 0 100 200 Meters North B U S GARDEN H KEY K E North coaling Y dock ruins S H T O OA M A L Magazine Officers’ Soldiers’ Quarters Barracks S N Visitor O Center Harbor light BUSH R Park KEY Cistern K Headquarters E Magazine Seaplane L beach A R E A Boat pier Dockhouse Swimming area Diinghy beach Good snorkeling off coaling docks and moat walls South coaling dock ruins E A A R A G E "11" H O R A N C "12" "10" Visible ruin Picnic area Primitive campground 2 Fort Jefferson Expedition Journal Restrooms 0 100 200 Feet Welcome Traveler! 0 100 200 Meters North B You have just arrived at Fort Jefferson on Garden Key, part of a group U S of islands known as the Dry Tortugas. As you explore this place, ask GARDEN H yourself, “How can artifacts reveal the stories of a place?” KEY K E North coaling Y As you search Garden Key for artifacts, record your observations in dock ruins S H this Expedition Journal. Remember that an artifact is something that T O OA M A provides evidence. Justifications are the reasons why the artifacts L support the statement. Then, using your expertise as an explorer of Magazine this national park, write a persuasive letter about the value of Dry Tortugas National Park. Officers’ Soldiers’ Quarters Barracks S N Visitor Fort Jefferson became a national monument in 1935 and later O Center Harbor light BUSH expanded to be Dry Tortugas National Park in 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Survey of Escambia County, Florida
    United States In cooperation with Department of the University of Florida, Agriculture Institute of Food and Soil Survey of Agricultural Sciences, Natural Agricultural Experiment Escambia County, Resources Stations, and Soil and Water Conservation Science Department; and the Service Florida Department of Florida Agriculture and Consumer Services How To Use This Soil Survey General Soil Map The general soil map, which is a color map, shows the survey area divided into groups of associated soils called general soil map units. This map is useful in planning the use and management of large areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the map, identify the name of the map unit in the area on the color-coded map legend, then refer to the section General Soil Map Units for a general description of the soils in your area. Detailed Soil Maps The detailed soil maps can be useful in planning the use and management of small areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the Index to Map Sheets. Note the number of the map sheet and turn to that sheet. Locate your area of interest on the map sheet. Note the map unit symbols that are in that area. Turn to the Contents, which lists the map units by symbol and name and shows the page where each map unit is described. The Contents shows which table has data on a specific land use for each detailed soil map unit. Also see the Contents for sections of this publication that may address your specific needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism
    Representative Jerome Zeringue Representative Gary Carter Chairman Vice Chairman Fiscal Year 21-22 HB1 Budget Review Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism House Committee on Appropriations House Fiscal Division April 9, 2021 Budget Analyst: David Lehman (225) 342-9101 Topic Page FY22 Budget Recommendation 3 Department Organization 4 Department Overview 5 Historical Trends 11 FY20 Unspent Authority 12 FY21 Current Expenditure Trend 14 Sources of Funding 15 Funding Changes 16 FY22 Expenditure Changes 18 Other Charges 21 Discretionary Expenses 23 Personnel Information 24 Topical Information 25 Department Contacts 37 Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism House Fiscal Division Page 2 Total Budget = $92,983,423 Means of Finance Agency Breakdown State General Fund $33,037,143 Budget Positions Interagency Transfers $6,669,968 Secretary $7,125,493 47 Fees & Self-generated $29,772,800 State Library $7,835,013 48 Statutory Dedications $14,483,171 State Museum $7,515,841 68 Federal $9,020,341 State Parks $35,775,522 296 Total $92,983,423 Cultural Development $8,083,579 32 Tourism $26,647,975 73 Total $92,983,423 564 Cultural Library Develop. 8% 9% Parks Tourism Museum Sec. 38% 29% 8% 8% Source: Office of Planning and Budget – Budget Supporting Documents Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism House Fiscal Division Page 3 Culture, Recreation and Tourism Office of the Cultural State Library State Museum State Parks Tourism Secretary Development Library Parks and Cultural Administration Museum Administration Services Recreation Development Management and Finance Arts Marketing Seafood Promotion and Marketing Board Administration Welcome Centers Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism House Fiscal Division Page 4 Office of the Secretary • Administrative Ensures efficient, accountable and entrepreneurial operation of all agencies within the department.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Opinion for Johnson Beach Area Project
    Executive Summary We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), have evaluated the impacts of the proposed Gulf Islands National Seashore/Johnson Beach Area (GINS) parking lot improvement project to be developed on the east end of Perdido Key in Escambia County, Florida. GINS encompasses 1,041 acres with high visitor use, primarily beach and Gulf of Mexico access. Coastal dune habitat can be found adjacent to the open beach. It is this habitat that supports the federally endangered Perdido Key beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus trissyllepsis) (PKBM). Gulf Islands National Seashore is one of three core population areas for PKBM. These core areas support the main population of PKBM and without them extinction would likely be near. GINS operates under a General Management Plan that supports management for PKBM and other protected species and their habitat. This parking lot expansion project aims to focus visitor use of the beaches to and through specific corridors to avoid critical and sensitive habitat. Currently the main parking lot holds 323 vehicles with additional roadside parking along both sides of the 1.2 mile paved park road. This road routinely gets covered in sand and requires regular maintenance to plow and remove. The focus of this expansion project is to remove the roadside parking, expand the main parking lot, and add three additional small parking lots along the park road. The entry way will also be expanded from a single entry and exit road to double entry/exit lanes. Removing and replacing dune walkovers, installing split rail fence and post and rope will direct pedestrian use from these parking areas to the open beach with limited disturbance to the habitat and species in the area.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAIRMEN of SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES [Table 5-3] 1789–Present
    CHAIRMEN OF SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES [Table 5-3] 1789–present INTRODUCTION The following is a list of chairmen of all standing Senate committees, as well as the chairmen of select and joint committees that were precursors to Senate committees. (Other special and select committees of the twentieth century appear in Table 5-4.) Current standing committees are highlighted in yellow. The names of chairmen were taken from the Congressional Directory from 1816–1991. Four standing committees were founded before 1816. They were the Joint Committee on ENROLLED BILLS (established 1789), the joint Committee on the LIBRARY (established 1806), the Committee to AUDIT AND CONTROL THE CONTINGENT EXPENSES OF THE SENATE (established 1807), and the Committee on ENGROSSED BILLS (established 1810). The names of the chairmen of these committees for the years before 1816 were taken from the Annals of Congress. This list also enumerates the dates of establishment and termination of each committee. These dates were taken from Walter Stubbs, Congressional Committees, 1789–1982: A Checklist (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985). There were eleven committees for which the dates of existence listed in Congressional Committees, 1789–1982 did not match the dates the committees were listed in the Congressional Directory. The committees are: ENGROSSED BILLS, ENROLLED BILLS, EXAMINE THE SEVERAL BRANCHES OF THE CIVIL SERVICE, Joint Committee on the LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, LIBRARY, PENSIONS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS, RETRENCHMENT, REVOLUTIONARY CLAIMS, ROADS AND CANALS, and the Select Committee to Revise the RULES of the Senate. For these committees, the dates are listed according to Congressional Committees, 1789– 1982, with a note next to the dates detailing the discrepancy.
    [Show full text]
  • Pensacola During the Civil War and Reconstruction John Matthew Brackett
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2005 "The Naples of America": Pensacola during the Civil War and Reconstruction John Matthew Brackett Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES “THE NAPLES OF AMERICA,” PENSACOLA DURING THE CIVIL WAR AND RECONSTRUCTION By JOHN MATTHEW BRACKETT A Thesis submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2005 Copyright 2005 John Matthew Brackett All Rights Reserved The members of the Committee approve the thesis of John Matthew Brackett defended on March 3, 2005. ____________________________ Joe M. Richardson Professor Directing Thesis ____________________________ James P. Jones, Jr. Committee Member ____________________________ Paul W. Strait Committee Member The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members. ii For My Mother Thanks for everything throughout the years iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS If history has taught me only one thing, it is that no one person is solely responsible for a tremendous accomplishment. I want to start by first thanking my major professor, Dr. Joe M. Richardson, for all of his valuable advice and knowledge on writing and Reconstruction. Without his time and help, I never would have completed this project. I also want to thank my committee members, Dr. Jim Jones and Dr. Paul Strait, as well as Dr. Frank Baglione and Dr. Frederick Davis for their suggestions, contributions, and encouragement. For their help in the difficult task of obtaining research, I would like to extend my sincerest appreciation to the staffs of the University of West Florida John C.
    [Show full text]