Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail Connecting
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH CHESAPEAKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL CONNECTING TRAILS EVALUATION STUDY 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 405 Annapolis, MD 21403 CONTENTS Acknowledgments 2 Executive Summary 3 Statement of Study Findings 5 Introduction 9 Research Team Reports 10 Anacostia River 11 Chester River 15 Choptank River 19 Susquehanna River 23 Upper James River 27 Upper Nanticoke River 30 Appendix: Research Teams’ Executive Summaries and Bibliographies 34 Anacostia River 34 Chester River 37 Choptank River 40 Susquehanna River 44 Upper James River 54 Upper Nanticoke River 56 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are truly thankful to the research and project team, led by John S. Salmon, for the months of dedicated research, mapping, and analysis that led to the production of this important study. In all, more than 35 pro- fessionals, including professors and students representing six universities, American Indian representatives, consultants, public agency representatives, and community leaders contributed to this report. Each person brought an extraordinary depth of knowledge, keen insight and a personal devotion to the project. We are especially grateful for the generous financial support that we received from the following private foundations, organizations and corporate partners: The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, The Clay- ton Fund, Inc., Colcom Foundation, The Conservation Fund, Lockheed Martin, the Richard King Mellon Foundation, The Merrill Foundation, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, the Rauch Foundation, The Peter Jay Sharp Foundation, Verizon, Virginia Environmental Endowment and the Wallace Genetic Foundation. Without their support this project would simply not have been possible. Finally, we would like to extend a special thank you to the board of directors of the Chesapeake Conser- vancy, and to John Maounis, Superintendent of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Office, for their leadership and unwavering commitment to the Captain John Smith Chesapeake Trail. PRINCIPAL PARTNERS John S. Salmon, Historian, Project Coordinator Paul Shackel, Center for Heritage Resource Studies, University of Maryland David Gadsby, Center for Heritage Resource Studies, University of Maryland Eric Larsen, Ph.D., Research Associate Daniel R. Griffith, former Director of the Delaware Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs, currently President of Griffith Ecological Consulting Jeffrey L. Hantman, Associate Professor and Director of Interdisciplinary Program in Archaeology, University of Virginia Karenne Wood, Director, Virginia Indian Heritage Program Deanna Beacham, Weapemeoc, Staff, Virginia Council on Indians Katherine Faull, Professor of German and Humanities, Bucknell University Ben Marsh, Professor of Geography and Environmental Studies, Bucknell University David Minderhout, Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, Bloomsburg University Alfred Siewers, Associate Professor of English, Bucknell University Donald Grinde, Professor and Chair of American Studies, University of Buffalo Sid Jamieson, Bucknell University Hannah Hardy, Program Manager, Pennsylvania Environmental Council John L. Seidel, Associate Professor of Anthropology and Environmental Studies, Washington College John Maounis, Superintendent, Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail Stephen R. Potter, Ph.D., Regional Archeologist, National Capital Region, National Park Service PROJECT TEAM Charlie Stek, Chairman, Chesapeake Conservancy Patrick Noonan, Vice-Chairman, Chesapeake Conservancy David O’Neill, President, Chesapeake Conservancy David Burke, Senior Advisor, Chesapeake Conservancy Joel Dunn, Program Coordinator, Sustainable Chesapeake, The Conservation Fund Tim Barrett, Intern, The Conservation Fund 2 * Please refer to the Chesapeake Conservancy website (www.ChesapeakeConservancy.org) to see the full list of advisors and supporters who contributed to the production of this report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY President George W. Bush signed the Captain John 1. Be closely associated with the voyages of explo- Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail Designa- ration of Captain John Smith in 1607–1609; tion Act (Public Law 109-418) into law on Decem- and/or ber 19, 2006. This is the first National Historic Trail 2. Be closely associated with the American Indian that is also primarily a water trail. The National towns and cultures of the 17th-century Chesa- Trails System Act of 1968 that created the network peake; and/or of recreation, scenic, and historic trails also author- 3. Be closely illustrative of the natural history of ized the designation by the Secretary of the Interior the 17th-century Chesapeake Bay Watershed. or the Secretary of Agriculture of connecting or side trails as components of the principal trail. Chesa- The following standards were created to establish the peake Conservancy, formerly the Friends of the relative closeness of association with each theme: John Smith Trail, funded a professional evaluation 1. Substantial association with Smith’s voyages is study of six Chesapeake Bay tributaries to determine established if there is data from both Smith’s their potential for designation as connecting trails: map and the accounts of Smith and others; • Anacostia River moderate association is established if there is • Chester River data from either Smith’s map or the accounts of Smith and others; and indirect association is • Choptank River established if there is a lack of data from either • Susquehanna River Smith’s map or the accounts of Smith and • Upper James River others • Upper Nanticoke River 2. Substantial association with American Indian towns and cultures is established if there is data Because no written criteria or standards appear to from Smith’s map, the 17th-century accounts of exist by which a potential connecting trail can be Smith and others, and archaeology; moderate evaluated for designation, the Conservancy has association is established if there is data from developed criteria based on themes enumerated in Smith’s map or the 17th-century accounts of the CAJO feasibility study in cooperation with the Smith and others, and archaeology; and indirect National Park Service (NPS). The research teams association is established if there is a lack of were directed to apply these criteria as they evalu- data from Smith’s map or the 17th-century ated the eligibility of potential connecting trails to accounts of Smith and others, and limited or no be components of the NHT. The themes are: archaeological evidence 1. Commemorate the voyages of exploration of 3. Substantial association with the natural history Captain John Smith in 1607–1609 of the Bay is established if there exists both 2. Recognize the American Indian towns and contemporary and historic documentation of cultures of the 17th-century Chesapeake the natural history; moderate association is 3. Call attention to the natural history of the Bay established if there is contemporary documen- (both historic and contemporary) tation but little or no historic documentation; and indirect association is established if there is These purposes or themes suggested the criteria little or no contemporary documentation and necessary to evaluate a potential connecting trail for no historic documentation inclusion as a component of CAJO. The criteria directly support and complement the purposes of The teams conducted research on the rivers, sub- CAJO as defined in the feasibility study. A potential mitted periodic reports on their progress and pre- connecting trail should be relatively closely associ- liminary findings, gave oral and illustrated presenta- ated with at least one of the criteria listed below to tions, evaluated the rivers for their relative closeness be eligible for designation; however, it is likely to be of association (“substantial,” “moderate,” “indirect,” more favorably received if more than one close etc.) with the foregoing standards, and delivered association is identified. A potential connecting final reports. The teams’ conclusions follow: trail should: 3 ANACOSTIA RIVER. The main branch of the river New York, as well as the West Branch to the vicinity from the connection with CAJO near the river’s of Lock Haven, as described in the Executive Sum- mouth at Hains Point upstream to Bladensburg mary and depicted on the map, meet the evaluation meets the evaluation criteria for a connecting trail. criteria for a connecting trail. The indicated seg- This branch has substantial association with Criteria ments of the Susquehanna River have moderate to 1 and 2 and indirect association with Criterion 3. substantial association with Criterion 1 and sub- The upper branches did not meet the criteria. stantial association with Criteria 2 and 3. CHESTER RIVER. The main branch of the river UPPER JAMES RIVER. The main branch of the from the connection with CAJO near the river’s river from the connection with CAJO at the Falls of mouth upstream to Millington, as well as certain the James River at Richmond west in two segments branches described in the Executive Summary and to Iron Gate, as described in the Executive Sum- depicted on the map, meet the evaluation criteria mary and depicted on the map, meets the evalua- for a connecting trail. The Chester River has mod- tion criteria for a connecting trail. The first seg- erate association with Criterion 1 and substantial ment, which extends from the Falls upstream to the association with Criteria 2 and 3. western extent shown on Smith’s map (to the con- fluence with the Tye River at Norwood), has sub- CHOPTANK RIVER. The main branch of the river