National Forests in Michigan

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

NATIONAL FORESTS

IN

MICHIGAN

UNITED

STATES

  • DEPARTMENT OF
  • AGRICULTURE

  • FOREST
  • SERVICE

NORTH

CENTRAL REGION

MILWAUKEE,

WIS.

THE

ON

Great

COVER.

Falls

Conglomerate on the

Black River.

p-3e«M

ERRATA

  • Line
  • Page

45,000,000.

be

should should
97,000,000 Porcupine

3

57

  • listed
  • be

not

4fur bearers.

vvilh

Si.o'jld

by its

red pine
"the

t»Vj". read

Cf
7

17

ClUoLC"G

  • of Munising".
  • east

rniies read "4

Should
2-3
44

UNITED

STATES
GOVERNMENT

  • PRINTING
  • OFFICE

WASHINGTON

  • :
  • 1941

  • •*
  • .

sEr^ «$•

THE HIAWATHA

FOREST.

  • NATIONAL
  • AU TRAIN FALLS ON

Drama of

Forests

Michigan

of the forests of has

in

DRAMA

been written

several acts

Michigan

THE

ficent woodlands

its

The action has

each with

colorful

of the

  • concerned the
  • magni

pageantry.

the of those forests in the

in

the present.

redman,

but sure

  • rapid
  • depletion

last

and their

  • slow
  • rebuilding
  • century,

The

iron and land
"northwest and

to

Indian furs and Indian

elusive

China,

souls,

In

1621, passage"

  • the white men to
  • Michigan.

Rock,
Etienne young copper brought after the

at

1

landed

  • Pilgrims
  • only
  • year
  • Plymouth

Superior
Brule,

  • of
  • and
  • was
  • reached Lake
  • protege
  • Champlain,
  • disappointed

  • to find its waters fresh. Thirteen
  • another
  • Nicolet,
  • later,

years

protege

Michigan

longed-for

Jean

  • of
  • French
  • of
  • unknown
  • Canada, entered the

the

Lake governor of

  • the Straits
  • Mackinac.

he

  • found the
  • never

Though

through

to

  • Orient,
  • did

the

fur

trade with the Indians

route

the

  • Nicolet
  • initiate
  • French

in this territory.

  • of
  • and

to

Heroic followers

Nicolet were the

  • Brule
  • fathers
  • and
  • Jogues

Jesuit

  • in
  • 1641 at Sault
  • who

  • the
  • Ste.

Marie,

Ojibwas in

  • Raymbault,
  • preached

was

where the first

settlement

made 27

Michigan

  • permanent
  • later

years

and Dablon. by Marquette

  • Frenchmen all,
  • and missionaries
  • traced the rivers and

and explorers, trappers,

lakes of

  • this
  • Radisson and Groseillers,

  • Marquette
  • territory

Joliet,

  • and La
  • Salle, but it was not to France that the rich

Hennepin

Michigan Treaty

of prize

By fell when the ambitions of two

clashed.

empires

  • the
  • great

to

in of Paris

1763

  • dominion.
  • English

the

treaty closing

Michigan

passed

Twenty

the War

withdraw later it

ceded to the United States was years

by

  • of
  • the Revolution, but not until 1796 did the British

garrison from
Detroit.

The

and in

1805 the

Northwest was

of Indiana

was

Territory of Indiana and

growing,

  • into the
  • two Territories

separated

  • Michigan
  • Lower

(the

In

to

the Union

as

  • a
  • 1837

was admitted

Michigan

for land lost to

which was to
State

and,

the

little known
Peninsula). in

received

Ohio,

prove compensation
Peninsula grudgingly

one of the richest ore basins in the

Upper

country.

White sails

to

  • bark
  • on

  • the
  • canoes

  • the Great Lakes and in turn
  • replaced

steamboats; the war

  • of
  • and
  • Ottawas,

gave

  • way
  • whoops
  • Chippewas,

  • Hurons faded
  • to historical

echoes;

and in

  • of
  • Indian

the natural resources. great

Michigan

of conquest

tribes was followed

a

  • new
  • by

  • struggle
  • conquest

[1]

  • NATIONAL
  • IN MICHIGAN

FORESTS

  • IN THE BEGINNING NEARLY ALL MICHIGAN WAS CLOTHED WITH
  • MAGNIFICENT

A

  • OF WHICH THIS IS
  • BEAUTIFUL

REMNANT.

FORESTS,

  • was more
  • than the
  • in

the

None of these

the

important

forests,

north,

pines

  • in
  • hardwoods

the south.

and the

era is

colorful

one of the most

  • in
  • periods

The

State. the

  • of
  • logging

Magnificent of the lumberjacks.

the

history stands of white and red

The

fell

  • before the
  • axes

  • pine
  • hungry

had

  • lumbering industry
  • exceptional

advantages

in

because the timber was massed

and was located

vast

on in

stands,

  • sizable
  • streams,

Michigan

making large-

scale

down in pine

  • operations
  • mainly

The

possible,

  • to mills.
  • first

great surge the

  • could be floated
  • which

logs

with the

  • of
  • and

  • the
  • came

exhaustion of

eastern forests

and the

  • lumbering
  • development

of of railroads. The

  • settlement
  • the

  • Chicago
  • Prairie

pine lumbering reached of growth

In

a stimulus from the West.

1890

furnished when

States feet

lumber and

  • its
  • 4,245,717,000

held of

Michigan

produced

  • in lumber
  • place

peak,

all

the States. above the latitude of center.

first

Out

  • production among
  • undisputed

the lumber

the

of

  • cities
  • most
  • the

Michigan

pine-lumbering

great

industry grew the first
Saginaw Valley,

of this years

  • reached their
  • in

the

The

Lake

forests

country

greatest glory of the

the turn white-pine and for 20

States,

  • preceding
  • century

Chicago

Middle

  • cried for the durable,
  • and

easily

  • worked white
  • and the
  • West
  • light,

echoed with the bite axes and the

  • of
  • woods

  • of
  • Michigan

  • Michigan.
  • pine

[2]

NATIONAL

FORESTS IN

MICHIGAN

of

  • swish
  • saws,
  • the

of "Timberrrr

  • .
  • .

."

as the

  • interrupted by
  • cry

great

and

a

  • trees creaked
  • and

little,

  • crashed.
  • listed,

  • moved 40
  • 40 into
  • by

the Manistee, Au
Lumberjacks

the forest

of

Michigan,

Saginaw were manufactured primeval

  • of
  • the banks

stripped.

  • Sable,
  • and

Muskegon,

left the woods for the sawmills

Log

to be

upon log lumber and into

  • south.
  • were

  • in
  • even floated
  • timbers

rafts to

were built
Huron National

Long

shipped in mills
New York, and

is

half

the

it

  • said that
  • the houses in Buffalo

from lumber cut in

there was

of

the

Forest. vicinity

present

  • on
  • in

  • the
  • the

Peninsula

Finally

and

once

  • "daylight
  • swamps"

Upper

Even all

over the once

wooded areas of

the State.

be an abundant

those who

heavily

  • believed there would
  • of

always

Michigan

supply

was set for pines

were disillusioned. And so the forest tableau wherein

Michigan

another scene in the of

the resources is the stage

  • rebuilding
  • dominant

theme.

THE
REBUILDING

FORESTS

are

Men

she is for better use of

  • in
  • the cut-over lands

Michigan;

where

areas; are

planning

a

chance nature with and aid is reclaiming

  • given
  • man's

devastated

from fire lands unsuited

  • through
  • to
  • planting
  • protection
  • farming

RECKLESS

AND
FOREST

  • LOGGING
  • MOSTLY MAN
  • IN
  • RESULTED VAST DEVASTATED
  • FIRES,

CAUSED,

  • LIKE
  • AREAS

THIS.

[3]

  • IN MICHIGAN
  • NATIONAL FORESTS

The new forests are

timber

forests.

  • turned into
  • producing

  • being
  • productive

to

further deterioration of

needs and are

human prevent

They give

to meet

helping

erosion.

  • effective
  • in

stream

aid soil

the basic resource

through

a

for

  • wildlife;
  • habitat
  • flow and water
  • regulation; they provide
  • they
  • supply

and other recreation. Most

better

  • hunting,
  • fishing,
  • important,
  • provide

  • to
  • to

employment

  • are and will continue
  • contribute

these forests

perhaps,

  • of
  • communities.
  • stabilization

forest

and

In this

and National
National Forest was

Michigan

of forest restoration, State

forests have

proclaimed. Manistee in

as

program

Back in 1909 the created. been in the

the Huron and

State,

national forests

Now there are five

  • and Hiawatha
  • Peninsula; and the

Lower Upper

public
Marquette

the the are

(administered

the in the

Peninsula. All

Upper

  • and
  • Ottawa

these

Michigan),

so as to be of the

  • forests and as such are
  • service

managed

highest to the

people.
Timber Production.

  • of the forest is that it can be renewed and
  • advantage

need

in
One never

some great

Protection from fire allows natural

be exhausted.

reproduction

  • of the burned-over land the desirable
  • of
  • but on much

  • areas,
  • types

and a new forest must

established

have

trees seedlings.

killed

  • be
  • been

  • by
  • planting

Nursery

  • Stock is
  • Forest Service nurseries
  • the Beal
  • provided by

  • BY
  • AIDED
  • FROM

  • IS
  • ON MUCH

NATURE,
PROTECTION
FIRE,
RESTORING FORESTS NATIONAL

  • OF THIS
  • CUT-

OVER LAND.

FOREST.)

(OTTAWA

[4]

NATIONAL

FORESTS IN

MICHIGAN

F-243170
SUCCESSFULLY
UPON THOUSANDS

RESTORE
OF SEVERELY BURNED AND ERODED ACRES

FORESTS CANNOT

THEMSELVES.
FOREST SERVICE

  • OF SEEDLING TREES TO REPLANT
  • ARE

  • RAISED
  • MILLIONS
  • SUCH AREAS

FOREST.)
IN

NURSERIES.

NURSERY, HURON NATIONAL

the

(BEAL

at East and the

97,000,000 needed

  • the
  • at

  • Manistique,
  • Tawas,

at

  • Watersmeet,
  • Wyman
  • Tourney

  • provide
  • Chittenden at Wellston. These

  • nurseries
  • an

average

of

  • for
  • each

been the national forests of

Michigan. Much

seedlings has

year done in

recent

  • with the
  • of

  • help
  • planting

the Civilian

is

undertaken

years

Conservation
Corps.

  • Reforestation of
  • the thousands of
  • in
  • of

of

  • acres
  • need

restocking each

  • careful
  • after

The

of

tree

  • only
  • planning.
  • requirements

Recommended publications
  • 100 Years of Michigan State Parks

    100 Years of Michigan State Parks

    1 ourmidland.com 2 Page 2 | Week of May 6 -11, 2019 Which state park was Michigan’s first? As the DNR celebrates the 100th anniversary of Michigan state parks system, a natural question arises – what was Michigan’s first state park? Well, the answer depends on how you interpret the question and isn’t simple. The 2019 state parks centennial celebration is centered around the formation of the Michigan State Park Commission by the state Legislature on May 12, 1919. The commission was given responsibility for overseeing, acquiring and maintaining public lands and establishing Michigan’s state parks system. One of the state’s earliest purchases was the site of Interlochen State Park in 1917. Although the land was purchased prior to 1919, Interlochen was the first public park to be transferred to the Michigan State Park Commission in 1920 and is considered Michigan’s first state park. However, many consider Mackinac Island as Michigan’s first state park, which is also true. Approximately 25 years before legislation estab- lished the state park commission, the federal government gifted the Mackinac Island property it owned to the state in 1895. The island was designat- ed as Michigan’s first state park under the Mackinac State Park Commission. Because Mackinac Island is operated under the Mackinac State Park Commission and was not placed under the Michigan State Park Commission, there is more than one answer to the “first state park” question. Interlochen State Park The Michigan Legislature paid $60,000 for the land that became Interlochen State Park, located southwest of Traverse City, in 1917.
  • Supporting Analysis

    Supporting Analysis

    APPENDIX A Supporting Analysis Table of Contents A.1 PARK SETTING ................................................................................................................................................ 2 A.2 DEMOGRAPHICS ............................................................................................................................................ 4 A.3 HISTORY OF THE LUDINGTON AREA ........................................................................................................... 6 A.4 HISTORY OF LUDINGTON STATE PARK ....................................................................................................... 7 A.5 LAND OWNERSHIP AND ACQUISITIONS ................................................................................................... 10 A.6 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER RECREATION RESOURCES ............................................................................. 13 A.7 LEGAL MANDATES ........................................................................................................................................ 19 A.8 NATURAL SYSTEMS AND NATURAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................... 23 A.9 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 27 A.10 EDUCATION AND INTERPRETATION ......................................................................................................... 30 A.11 RECREATION RESOURCES .........................................................................................................................
  • From the Gilbert Lake Project, Huron-Manistee National Forests

    From the Gilbert Lake Project, Huron-Manistee National Forests

    BIOLOGICAL OPINION Effects to the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) from the Gilbert Lake Project, Huron-Manistee National Forests Prepared by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Michigan Ecological Services Field Office East Lansing, MI Log # 18-R3-ELFO-03 July 19, 2018 INTRODUCTION This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (BO) based on our review of the U.S. Forest Service’s (USFS) proposed Gilbert Lake Project on the Huron-Manistee National Forests (HMNF) and the Project’s effects on the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) in accordance with Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The HMNF determined that the proposed project was “likely to adversely affect” Indiana bat and the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis, NLEB), and was “not likely to adversely affect” the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus, EMR). The HMNF’s request for formal consultation was received on January 24, 2018. Additional information about the proposed project and the project’s effects to listed species was provided on March 15, 2018. On March 2, 2006, the Service issued a programmatic Biological Opinion (programmatic BO) for the HMNF revised 2006 Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). In the programmatic BO, we evaluated the effects of HMNF Forest Plan activities on bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Kirtland's warbler (Setophaga kirtlandii), piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and its critical habitat, Pitcher's thistle (Cirsium pitcheri), Indiana bat, and Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis). We concurred that implementation of the Forest Plan was likely to adversely affect these species, but not likely to adversely affect piping plover critical habitat.
  • United States Department of the Interior

    United States Department of the Interior

    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE East Lansing Field Office (ES) 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 IN REPLY REFER TO: East Lansing, Michigan 48823-6316 May 1, 2015 Leslie Auriermno, Forest Supervisor Huron-Manistee National Forests 1755 South Mitchell St. Cadillac, MI 49601-8533 Re: Fonnal Section 7 Consultation on the Huron-Manistee National Forests' Ongoing and Planned Actions- Log# 1O-R3-ELF0-03 Dear Ms. Amiemmo: This letter transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion for the Huron­ Manistee National Forests' (HMNF) ongoing and planned actions in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S .C. 1531 et seq.). The HMNF detennined that the proposed actions were "Likely to Adversely Affect" the norihern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). We base the enclosed Opinion on information provided in several documents, including your northern long-eared project matrix and Biological Assessment, the Programmatic Biological Assessment and Opinion for the HMNF's Land and Resource Management Plan, and our April 1, 2015, Conference Opinion. Other sources ofinfonnation include previous telephone conversations, e-mails and meetings. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at our East Lansing Field Office. After reviewing the current status of northern long-eared bat, the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects of the proposed action, and the cumulative effects, it is our biological opinion that the action, as proposed, is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of northern long-eared bat With respect to ESA compliance, all aspects of the project description are binding.
  • Sylvania Wilderness for More Information, Contacatn: DERSON LAKE BIG DONAHUE LAKE Florence to Big Bateau Lake 34 Rods 36

    Sylvania Wilderness for More Information, Contacatn: DERSON LAKE BIG DONAHUE LAKE Florence to Big Bateau Lake 34 Rods 36

    2 DAMON LAKE Watersmeet 3.5 miles 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 Sylvania 30 29 PIT LAKE Wilderness CUTTERS POND 28 ROSS LAKE ALBINO LAKE and Recreation RAVEN LAKE PORCUPINE LAKE HATTIE LAKE 35 Area BIG AFRICAN LAKE 36 31 32 RECORD LAKE 33 PARTRIDGE LAKE GOG-535 MAUD LAKE 34 DOYLE LAKE 35 36 31 32 33 BIG AFRICAN LAKE SNAP JACK LAKE CLEAR LAKE Sylvania RICKLES LAKE Entrance TRAIL LAKE Station HELEN LAKE Clark Lake Campground KERR LAKE WOLF DEER-1 LONG LAKE COYOTE LITTLE TRAIL LAKE 2 WEST BEAR LAKE DEER-2 1 EAST BEAR LAKE PILOT LAKE 6 5 KATHERINE LAKE PORCUPINE-2 4 HIGH LAKE 3 2 HILLTOP LAKE PORCUPINE-1 RACCOON 1 JENNINGS LAKE 6 5 GOG-535 4 BOBCAT LYNX-2 THOUSAND ISLAND LAKE ASH-1 LYNX-1 ASH-2 JAY LAKE ERMINE-2 ERMINE-1 BALSAM-1 COREY LAKE 6320 LILUIS LAKE BALSAM-2 MINK-1 MOUNTAIN LAKE CHICKADEE LAKE LOUISE LAKE MINK-2 BEAR-2 CEDAR-2 PINE-1 CHIPMUNK BEAR-1 11 CEDAR-1 BEAVER-1 12 PINE-2 7 SQUIRREL-2 8 CLARK LAKE 9 DOROTHY LAKEELSIE LAKE 10 SQUIRREL-1 BEAVER-2 LITTLE DUCK LAKE BIRCH 12 CROOKED LAKE FOX-1 7 MAPLE-2 11 8 MAPLE-1 9 FOX-2 MULE LAKE SISKIN LAKE BADGER-1 BADGER-2 DAISY LAKE FISHER-1 9 FISHER-2 3 5 - G HAY LAKE O DEVILS HEAD LAKE G PERCH-1 GERMAIN LAKE TRAPPER LAKE 14 13 PERCH-2 INDIAN LAKE 18 17 16 15 14 MALLARD-1 13 18 17 16 DREAM LAKE MALLARD-2 WHITEFISH LAKE EAST BAY LAKE PIKE-1 LOON LAKE PIKE-2 OSPREY-2 DUCK LAKE 23 BASS LOON 24 OSPREY-1 19 LOIS LAKE 20 DEER ISLAND LAKE 6320 21 22 EAGLE-2 23 24 19 20 Mic EAGLE-1 21 higan MOSS LAKE MAMIE LAKE Wilderness Campsites Wisc FISHER LAKE onsin Boat Landing JOHNSTON SPRINGS Portage Lengths
  • 2013 Ontonagon, Presque Isle, Black, and Montreal River Watersheds

    2013 Ontonagon, Presque Isle, Black, and Montreal River Watersheds

    MI/DEQ/WRD-13/014MI/DEQ/WRD-15/024 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WATER RESOURCES DIVISION JULY 2015 STAFF REPORT A BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE ONTONAGON, PRESQUE ISLE, BLACK, AND MONTREAL RIVERS WATERSHEDS AND OTHER SELECTED WATERSHEDS IN GOGEBIC, HOUGHTON, IRON, AND ONTONAGON COUNTIES, MICHIGAN JULY-AUGUST 2013 INTRODUCTION Staff of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), Surface Water Assessment Section (SWAS), conducted biological, chemical, and physical habitat surveys during the summer of 2013 throughout the Ontonagon (Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC] 04020102), Presque Isle (HUC 04020101), Black (HUC 04020101), and Montreal (HUC 04010302) (OPBM) Rivers watersheds. Additionally, some streams located in smaller western Lake Superior coastal watersheds were surveyed (Figure 1). The goals of this monitoring were to: (1) assess the current status and condition of individual water bodies and determine whether Michigan Water Quality Standards (WQS) are being met; (2) evaluate biological integrity temporal trends; (3) satisfy monitoring requests submitted by external and internal customers; and (4) identify potential nonpoint source (NPS) pollution problems. These surveys qualitatively characterized the biotic integrity of macroinvertebrate communities with respect to existing habitat conditions at randomly selected sites throughout the OPBM watersheds region. The results of the surveys are used by the SWAS’s Status and Trends Program to estimate the amount of these watersheds that is supporting the other indigenous aquatic life and wildlife designated use component of R 323.1100(1)(e) of the Part 4 rules, WQS, promulgated under Part 31, Water Resources Protection, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended. BACKGROUND AND HISTORICAL SAMPLING EFFORTS The OPBM watersheds are located in the extreme west end of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.
  • Geology of the Porcupine Mountains

    Geology of the Porcupine Mountains

    Geology of the Porcupine Mountains Overlying the Porcupine Volcanics is a produced major thrust faults and folding sequence of fluvial (river deposited) of Keweenawan strata. As a result of this The bedrock of the Porcupine sedimentary rock known as the Copper deformation, the Porcupine Mountains Mountains records part of the evolution Harbor Conglomerate. The deposition of anticline, Presque Isle syncline and Iron of the North American continent during these rocks marks the end of rift River syncline–all features that can be the late Precambrian Era. Rock strata extension and the beginning of observed in the park–were formed. within the mountains belong to the sedimentation in the post-rift basin. The Keweenawan rocks are notable for Keweenawan Supergroup, a thick Conglomerates of the Copper Harbor significant copper deposits. Secondary sequence of volcanic and sedimentary formation contain clasts derived primarily mineralization by copper, epidote, quartz, rocks (exceeding 25 km) deposited about from Keweenawan Supergroup volcanic prehnite, and pumpellyite fill voids, 1.1 billion years ago, during and shortly rocks. fissures and vesicles in basalt flows. after an episode of continental rifting. A series of thin basalt flows marks a Utilization of the region's copper deposits This Midcontinental rift system brief return to volcanism during Copper was begun by prehistoric peoples active represents the early stages of continental Harbor deposition. These flows, called in the region long before European breakup and is a major geologic feature the Lakeshore Traps, form one of the arrival. Historic extraction of the copper of the North Ameerican Continent. park’s most prominent geologic features; resource began in 1845, when the region Outside of the Lake Superior region, the extended basalt-capped escarpment witnessed the nation's first mining rush.
  • PDF for Print

    PDF for Print

    UPPER GREAT LAKES Physical Description species including the fisher, black bear, snowshoeing, nature study and soli- The Upper Great Lakes Keystone Forest loon, osprey and brook trout. There is tude. is part of the larger Western Great also potential habitat for the recovery Lakes forest ecoregion. Even today, the of extirpated or rare species such as the Threats remote Upper Peninsula of Michigan, cougar, lynx, marten and wolverine. As the U.S. Forest Service has run out northern Wisconsin and Minnesota har- The most dominant feature of the of areas to log in other regions, the bor some of the most expansive forests region is water, with hundreds of miles rate of cutting has skyrocketed in the remaining in the lower 48 states. A mix of shoreline on Lake Superior; tens of national forests of the Great Lakes. The of spruce-fir coniferous forest and a thousands of lakes, ponds and wet- state forests in the region have long hardwood mix of aspen, paper birch, lands; and thousands of miles of rivers been grossly mismanaged and continue beech and maple dominate this key- and streams. This keystone forest is to suffer major ecological damage stone forest. This vast forest is home to well-known for its diverse backcountry from logging, road-building and inten- most of the wolves and almost one- recreational opportunities, including sive motorized recreation. A significant half of the bald eagles in the lower 48 hiking, camping, canoeing, boating, threat on both federal and state lands states, as well as other sensitive wildlife fishing, hunting, cross-country skiing, is widespread clearcutting to benefit commonly hunted wildlife, such as deer and ruffed grouse, to the detri- ment of many sensitive native species.
  • Emmet Cheboygan Lake Michigan Lake Superior Lake

    Emmet Cheboygan Lake Michigan Lake Superior Lake

    Superior Region - East RoadRoad andand TrailTrail BicyclingBicycling GuideGuide ) X M Whitefish Twp Park !! ! Whitefish Point Vermillion _ !! Twomile Weatherhogs reek Lk. ns C Lk. Lake Superior Crisp Point ) Brow Browns Marsh Lakes d R Lk. t Be in tsy McMullan Lakes o Ri v P e r h 11 s i CR 412 f e t T Hawkins i hree h M Lk. W i l e Shelldrake Dam 9 Little Lake Harbor C r Betsy e State Forest Campground e River Little!! _¬ k X ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Lk. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Bodi Lake 9 9 ! ! Andrus Lake ! ! ! Andrus ! X ! Bear Lk. X ! ! ! ! ! State Forest Campground Lk. Mouth of Two Hearted River ! Ile Parisienne ! ! ! Culhane State Forest Campground ! ! !! 9 !! !! Bodi Lk. ! Lk. State Forest Campground! X ! ! ! ! ! s ! X ! Bet y ! ! ! R ! Culhane! Lake ! ! ! i ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! v ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! 9 e ! ! ! ! ! ! ! State Forest Campground r !! ! ! ! ! ! Lake Superior ! Shelldrake ! r ! ! Randolph Muskallonge Lake State Park e Muskrat ! ! ! ! ! 9 ! v ! ! ! i ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 9 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! State Forest Campground! ! ! ! ! ! R ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! r ! ! Lk. ! ! ! ! e ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !iv ! ! ! ! d Lakes ! ! ! ! ! ! R ! ! ) ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! e ! r ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !e! ! !! ! t ! Section k ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! c ! ! ! ! !! ! ! u ! ! ! ! r ! S ! ! ! ! ! d ! ! ! ! ! ! a S ! ! ! Deer! Park ! X n ! ! ! ! ! ! ! i ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! l ! ! ! e ! ! B Mud ! ! ! u ! ! ! X ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Woodland Park ! ! H !! GRAND MARAISc ! ! Four Lk. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! o ! ! ! k ! ! ! ! ! ! !
  • Personal Memoirs of a Residence of Thirty Years with the Indian Tribes on the American Frontiers

    Personal Memoirs of a Residence of Thirty Years with the Indian Tribes on the American Frontiers

    Library of Congress Personal memoirs of a residence of thirty years with the Indian tribes on the American frontiers Engraved by A. B. Plulad HENRY R. SCHOOLCRAFT L.L.D. PERSONAL MEMOIRS OF A RESIDENCE OF THIRTY YEARS WITH THE INDIAN TRIBES ON THE AMERICAN FRONTIERS: WITH BRIEF NOTICES OF PASSING EVENTS, FACTS, AND OPINIONS, A.D. 1812 TO A.D. 1842. BY HENRY R one . SCHOOLCRAFT. SMITHSONIAN 1639 INSTITUTION. PHILADELPHIA: LIPPINCOTT, GRAMBO AND CO., SUCCESSORS TO GRIGG, ELLIOT AND CO. 1851. E77 S43 Copy 2 Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1861, by HENRY R. SCHOOLCRAFT, in the Office of the Clerk of the District Court is need for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 95475 PHILADELPHIA: T. K. AND P. G. COLLINS, PRINTERS. TO ALEXANDER B. JOHNSON, Esq. OF UTICA. My Dear Sir :— I feel impelled to place your name before these sheets, from a natural impulse. It is many years since I accompanied you to the Genesee country, which was, Personal memoirs of a residence of thirty years with the Indian tribes on the American frontiers http://www.loc.gov/resource/ lhbum.15006 Library of Congress at that time, a favorite theatre of enterprise, and called the “Garden of he West.” This step, eventually, led me to make deeper and more adventurous inroads into the American wilderness. If I am mistaken, you will peruse these brief memoranda of my exploratory journeys and residence in the wide area of the west, and among barbarous tribes, in a spirit of appreciation, and with a lively sense of that providential care, in human affairs, that equally shields the traveler amidst the vicissitudes of the forest, and the citizen at his fireside.
  • Biodiversity of Michigan's Great Lakes Islands

    Biodiversity of Michigan's Great Lakes Islands

    FILE COPY DO NOT REMOVE Biodiversity of Michigan’s Great Lakes Islands Knowledge, Threats and Protection Judith D. Soule Conservation Research Biologist April 5, 1993 Report for: Land and Water Management Division (CZM Contract 14C-309-3) Prepared by: Michigan Natural Features Inventory Stevens T. Mason Building P.O. Box 30028 Lansing, MI 48909 (517) 3734552 1993-10 F A report of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. 309-3 BIODWERSITY OF MICHIGAN’S GREAT LAKES ISLANDS Knowledge, Threats and Protection by Judith D. Soule Conservation Research Biologist Prepared by Michigan Natural Features Inventory Fifth floor, Mason Building P.O. Box 30023 Lansing, Michigan 48909 April 5, 1993 for Michigan Department of Natural Resources Land and Water Management Division Coastal Zone Management Program Contract # 14C-309-3 CL] = CD C] t2 CL] C] CL] CD = C = CZJ C] C] C] C] C] C] .TABLE Of CONThNTS TABLE OF CONTENTS I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii INTRODUCTION 1 HISTORY AND PHYSICAL RESOURCES 4 Geology and post-glacial history 4 Size, isolation, and climate 6 Human history 7 BIODWERSITY OF THE ISLANDS 8 Rare animals 8 Waterfowl values 8 Other birds and fish 9 Unique plants 10 Shoreline natural communities 10 Threatened, endangered, and exemplary natural features 10 OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH ON MICHIGAN’S GREAT LAKES ISLANDS 13 Island research values 13 Examples of biological research on islands 13 Moose 13 Wolves 14 Deer 14 Colonial nesting waterbirds 14 Island biogeography studies 15 Predator-prey
  • The National Forests of Michigan, Federal Payments to States

    The National Forests of Michigan, Federal Payments to States

    The National Forests of Michigan Federal Payments to States The Eastern Region of the U.S. Forest Service The Federal Government reimburses States that contain National Forest System Lands in several ways. The 25 Percent Payments. The first county payment or revenue is the “25 Percent Fund payment.” The 25 Percent Fund payment is based on gross National Forest receipts within a National Forest and is allocated to counties by the proportion of the total National Forest acreage within each county in the particular National Forest. Secure Rural Schools. The Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program is an alternative to 25 Percent Payments. This program allows counties to elect the manner in which their payment is calculated. A county may choose to continue to receive the 25-percent payments based on a 7-year rolling average of receipts from national forests located in the State. Counties may elect to receive the Full Payment option, in which Title I dollars are allocated to roads and schools while Title II and III funds are spent on work completed on or that benefit National Forest System lands. The PILT Payment. Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) are Federal payments to local governments that help offset losses in property taxes due to nontaxable Federal lands within their boundaries. The key law that implements the payment is Public Law 94-565. The Law recognizes that the inability of local government to collect property taxes on Federally-owned land can create a financial impact. Mineral Royalties. The third major Federal program that funds States and counties involves mineral royalties generated on Federal lands.