DOCSLIB.ORG

Cleveland Harbor, Operations and Maintenance, Cuyahoga County, Ohio

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cleveland Harbor, Operations and Maintenance, Cuyahoga County, Ohio FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Cleveland Harbor Operations & Maintenance Cuyahoga County, Ohio Prepared by U. S. Army Engineer District, Buffalo, NY April 1974 ■ STATEMENT OF FINDINGS OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE OF CLEVELAND HARBOR Cuyahoga County, Ohio I have reviewed and evaluated, in the light of the overall public interest, the documents concerning the proposed action, as well as the stated views of other interested agencies and the concerned public, relative to the various practicable alternatives in accomplishing operations and maintenance of Cleveland Harbor, Ohio. The possible consequences of these alternatives have been studied according to environmental, social well-being and economic effects, including regional and national development, and engineering feasibility. In evaluation, the following points were considered pertinent: a. Environmental considerations. Dredging Cleveland Harbor to authorized project depths and maintenance to piers and breakwaters makes possible the continued safe navigation in the area. Annual dredging results in temporary increases in turbidity and suspended solids and a decrease of water quality in the project area. Disturbed benthic habitat also results from each year's dredging which impacts upon developing flora and fauna. Periodic breakwater and pier maintenance causes transient dust and noise level increases. Disposal of polluted Cleveland Harbor sediment in Lake Erie open water is undesirable and is opposed by many agencies. Consequently, since 1968, dredged river material has been placed in pilot disposal areas. These sites do not have sufficient capacity to accommodate all the material to be dredged in 1974. Delay in completion of Disposal Site 12, a 2 1/2-3 year capacity area, until August, 1974 may require that strong consideration be given to open-lake disposal of 50,000 cubic yards of polluted, river summer shoaling material (Disposal Site 12 was originally scheduled for completion in April, 1974, but has been delayed due to difficulty in obtaining properly-graded stone material). Two alternatives being considered in lieu of 1974 open lake dumping, should it become necessary, are dump scow bottom dumping in the partially completed Disposal Site 12 or transference of enough compacted material from Pilot Site 9 to the partially completed adjacent Site 12 to accommodate the deposition of 50,000 cubic yards of freshly dredged summer shoal material. Adverse environmental impacts would accrue from either of these two alternatives in direct relation to the length of uncompleted southern wall of Disposal Site 12 since material could escape through the opening into the outer harbor. The latter of these two alternatives would minimize this impact. b. Social well-being considerations. Operations and maintenance of Cleveland Harbor are not expected to adversely affect the overall social well-being of the area's populace. On the contrary, curtailment or dis­ continuance of the project would probably place indirect adverse social impacts on the Cleveland community, since 100,000 jobs are directly or indirectly port-related. c. Engineering considerations. Most of the alternatives considered are technically feasible to include: discontinuance of dredging; open lake dumping of all sediments; chemical treatment of sediments; and the two alternatives described in section "a" which are still being considered in lieu of possible 1974 open lake dumping. The other two alternatives, control of upstream erosion and pollution abatement, are not yet completely attainable and are largely within the jurisdiction of other Federal, State and local agencies. d. Economic considerations. Open-dumping the dredged material in Lake Erie is the least costly method of spoil disposal. It should be recognized, however, that some intangible environmental benefits can be derived from use of inclosed disposal areas after they are filled and compacted. The location and operating procedures of many industries are dependent on the availability of deep-draft water transportation within the project area. Curtailment or discontinuance of maintenance dredging would require these industries to use other, more costly, transportation routes, with major adverse economic effects directly on the industry and indirectly on employees and customers. I find that the proposed operations and maintenance of Cleveland Harbor are based on thorough analysis and evaluation of various available and practicable alternative courses of action for achieving stated objectives; that v.-herever adverse effects are found to be involved, they cannot be avoided by implementing alternative courses of action which would achieve the congressionally specified purposes; that where the recommended action has an adverse effect, this effect is either ameliorated or substantially outweighed by other considerations of national policy, statutes and administrative directives, and that, on balance, the total public interest should best be served by the implementation of the recommended action. Further, I find that should Diked Disposal Site 12 not be completed by August, 1974, the recommended disposal procedures will require temporary revision and approximately 50,000 cubic yards of polluted, river summer shoaling material may have to be deposited in the open lake. Two alternatives to open lake disposal of the 50,000 cubic yards, namely dump scow bottom dumping in the partially completed Site 12 Disposal Area or transference of compacted material from Pilot Site 9 to partially completed adjacent Site 12 to make room for the shoal material, may be possible but would most likely involve higher costs and other environmental problems, such as adverse impacts on the Cleveland Municipal Power Plant and other facilities in the immediate area. BERNARD C. HUGHES ' Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer I concur in the preceding Statement of Findings. DATE: ------ 7 W. 0. BACHUS Brigadier General, USA Division Engineer I concur in the preceding Statement of Findings. FOR THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS: (Date) k. W. MORRIS /Major, General, USA Director of Civil Works SUMMARY Cleveland Harbor Operation and Maintenance Cuyahoga County, Ohio ( ) Updated draft (X) Final Environmental Statement Responsible Office: U. S. Army Engineer District, Buffalo, NY 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action; Dredging about 1,225,000 cubic yards of sediment annually, including 50,000 cubic yards of river sediment which may be deposited in Lake Erie in 1974 if pilot disposal sites are filled and ongoing construction of another diked disposal facility is not com­ pleted; maintenance of piers and breakwaters. It is now contemplated that alternative f. below will be used. No open lake dumping will occur without concurrence of EPA. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Continued safe navigation in Cleveland Harbor; probable deposition of sediment in Lake Erie. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: Probable accelerated introduction of polluted sediment into the lake during 1974 from open-lake dumping of 50,000 cubic yards and annual temporary increases in turbidity, suspended solids, siltation and odor during working periods. 4. Alternatives: a. Discontinuance of dredging b. Open-lake dumping of all sediments c. Control of upstream erosion d. Pollution abatement e. Chemical treatment of sediments f. Dump scow bottom dumping in uncompleted site 12 during part of 1974 g. Transference of compacted site 9 material to unfinished site 12 and subsequent deposition of newly dredged material in inclosed site 9 during part of 1974 5. Comments Received: Citizens for Land and Water Use Cleveland City Planning Commission Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Company Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority Cleveland Metropolitan Park District Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation The Kinsman Marine Transit Company Lake Carriers Association The Lake Erie Watershed Conservation Foundation Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Ohio Historical Society Regional Planning Commission - County of Cuyahoga Republic Steel Corporation Sierra Club U. S. Coast Guard U. S. Department of Commerce U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development U. S. Department of the Interior U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ; 6. Draft Statement to CEQ 14 January 1972 Updated Draft Statement to CEQ 7 February 1974 Final Statement to CEQ 2 3 JUL b/4___ Cleveland Harbor Operations & Maintenance Cuyahoga County, OH April 1974 Chapter Subject Page 1 Project Description 1 1.1 General 1 1.2 Outer Harbor 1 1.3 Rivers 5 1.4 Projections 6 1.5 Description of Environmental Studies 8 2 Environmental Setting Without the Project 10 2.1 General Description of the Area 10 2.1.1 Geology Soils and Topography 10 2.1.2 Watershed 12 2.1.3 Climate 12 2.1.4 Population and Economy 14 2.2 Lake Erie Setting 16 2.2.1 Lake Erie Central Basin 16 2.2.2 Circulation Patterns 16 2.2.3 Lake Levels 19 2.2.4 Fishery Resources 21 2.3 Cleveland Harbor Setting 25 2.3.1 The Facilities of Cleveland Harbor 25 2.3.2 Waterborne Commerce 29 Chapter Subject Page 2.3.3 Character and Nature of Harbor Sediments 36 2.3.4 Water Quality 38 2.3.4.1 General 38 2.3.4.2 Cuyahoga River: Inner Harbor 41 2.3.4.3 Cleveland Outer Harbor 43 2.3.5 Land Use 43 2.3.6 Recreation 44 2.3.7 Historic and Archaeological Sites 44 2.3.8 Fishery Resources 45 2.3.9 Birdlife 47 2.3.10 Municipal Water and Waste Facilities 47 3 Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action 49 3.1 Beneficial Impacts 49 3.2 Adverse Impacts 50 3.3 General Impacts 52 4 Any Adverse Environmental Effects Which Cannot be Avoided Should the Proposed Project be Implemented 54 5 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 57 6 The Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Man's Environment and the Maintenance and Enhance­ ment of Long-Term Productivity 66 7 Any Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Which Would be Involved if the Proposed Action Should be Implemented 67 Chapter Subject Page 8 Coordination With Others 68 8.1 General 68 8.2 Comments and Responses on Draft EIS 69 Appendix A Glossary of Terms Appendix B Water Quality Criteria Adopted by the State of Ohio's Water Pollution Control Board Appendix C Letters requesting Historical and Archaeological Data Appendix D Letters of Comment Plates P aSe.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ______No
    In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 19-3129 WISCONSIN CENTRAL LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 1:16-cv-04271 — Andrea R. Wood, Judge. ____________________ ARGUED SEPTEMBER 25, 2020 — DECIDED MARCH 31, 2021 ____________________ Before RIPPLE, BRENNAN, and ST. EVE, Circuit Judges. BRENNAN, Circuit Judge. Decades ago, railroad company Wisconsin Central, Ltd. entered into an agreement that included the purchase of rail lines from Soo Line Railroad Company. Part of that agreement allocated responsibility for future environmental liabilities. Years later, contamination was discovered near one of those lines in Ashland, Wisconsin on the shore of Lake Superior. 2 No. 19-3129 The railroads jointly defended and settled responsibility for the investigation and remediation of that site. Then they each sought indemnification from the other. The district court awarded summary judgment to Soo Line for damages, attor- neys’ fees, and costs. On appeal, the railroads dispute when a claim was first asserted, and how much of the cost of defending and settling the matter was related to the rail lines and their operation. In- demnification under the agreement turns on both issues. I. In a 1987 Asset Purchase Agreement (“Agreement”) Wis- consin Central purchased various assets of Soo Line’s Lake States Transportation division, including physical rail lines in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan (“LST”).1 The Agree- ment provided for a detailed allocation of liability and indem- nification of each party by the other.
    [Show full text]
  • A Steel-Hulled Bulk Freighter Measuring 610.9 in Length, with a Beam of 60.0 Feet, and a Depth of Hold of 32.6 Feet
    NFS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Rev. 8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL National Register of Historic Places REGISTER Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, styles, materials, and areas of significance, enter only the categories and subcategories listed in the instructions. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900a). Type all entries. 1. Name of Property_________________________________________________ historic name Freighter WILLIAM A. IRVIN other names/site number N/A 2. Location street & number Minnesota Slip. Duluth Harbor I_| not for publication N/A city, town Duluth I I vicinity N/A state Minnesota code MN county St . Louis code 137 zip code 55802 3. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property I I private I I building(s) Contributing Noncontributing I~x1 public-local I I district ____buildings I I public-State I I site ____ sites I I public-Federal Pn structure ____ structures I I object ____ objects ____Total Name of related multiple property listing: Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register _Q______ 4. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this S nomination EH request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
    [Show full text]
  • Herring Gulls, Larus Argentatus, Nesting on Sandusky Bay, Lake Erie, 1989
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Publications Plant Health Inspection Service October 1989 Herring Gulls, Larus argentatus, Nesting on Sandusky Bay, Lake Erie, 1989 Richard A. Dolbeer U.S. Department of Agriculture, Denver Wildlife Research Center P.P. Woronecki U.S. Department of Agriculture, Denver Wildlife Research Center T. W. Seamans U.S. Department of Agriculture, Denver Wildlife Research Center, [email protected] B. N. Buckingham Ohio Department of Natural Resources E. C. Cleary U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal Damage Control Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Dolbeer, Richard A.; Woronecki, P.P.; Seamans, T. W.; Buckingham, B. N.; and Cleary, E. C., "Herring Gulls, Larus argentatus, Nesting on Sandusky Bay, Lake Erie, 1989" (1989). USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications. 129. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc/129 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Herring Gulls, Larus argentatus, Nesting on Sandusky Bay, Lake Erie, 19891 R. A. DOLBEER, P. P. WORONECKI, T. W. SEAMANS, B. N. BUCKINGHAM, AND E. C. CLEARY, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Denver Wildlife Research Center, 6100 Columbus Avenue, Sandusky, OH 44870, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Resthaven Wildlife Area, P.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashland, Wisconsin a Coastal Community Smart Growth Case Study Author: Rebecca Pearson Editor: Victoria Pebbles, Great Lakes Commission
    Ashland, Wisconsin A Coastal Community Smart Growth Case Study Author: Rebecca Pearson Editor: Victoria Pebbles, Great Lakes Commission Ashland is a close. The busy small port and the community in shipping industry northeastern that served it went Wisconsin, from moving located on millions of tons of Chequamegon iron ore, Bay on the brownstone and southwest shore lumber to an of Lake occasional Superior. shipment of coal. Endowed with By 2009, the an abundance of Canadian National natural Railway which resources (timber, water, iron ore and acquired Wisconsin Central was the only railroad brownstone) and access to the Great Lakes, the service in Ashland. city of Ashland flourished as a port in the 1800s where raw and processed natural materials where As industries declined, so did the population. shipped to urban areas elsewhere in the Great Ashland lost population at a rate of about 5 Lakes region. At that time, Ashland’s waterfront percent every decade from the early 1900s until was developed to serve the industries that the 1990s. From 1990 to 2000, Ashland’s supported the processing and transport of natural population began to stabilize with only a 0.8 resources, such as sawmills, lumberyards and iron percent decline. According to the 2000 U.S. docks. Supporting commercial development grew Census, Ashland’s population is just over 8,600. up south of the waterfront, while residential development occurred still south of the Like many post-war cities and towns across the commercial area. Great Lakes region and elsewhere in the U.S, while the city itself contracted, the surrounding Railroads also played an important role in towns and rural areas of Ashland County, Ashland’s growth from the late 1800s into the experienced a 3.4 percent population increase early 1900s.
    [Show full text]
  • Sandusky Bay Strategic Restoration Plan Sandusky, Ohio
    CITY OF SANDUSKY Sandusky Bay Strategic Restoration Plan Sandusky, Ohio A Strategic Implementation Plan prioritizes coastal wetland restoration projects for implementation to maximize water qual- ity enhancement, nutrient and sediment reductions, and fi sh and wildlife habitat improvements. construction, nutrient load- Working closely with the ings, shoreline hardening, and City, Biohabitats is lead- changes in land use practices. ing the 18-month planning In addition, the nutrient load- effort, which will ultimately ings are stimulating harm- yield a portfolio of restora- ful algal blooms. The Bay tion projects through the use has been deemed a priority of Landscape Conservation management area by the Great Collaborative (LCC) and Lakes Fishery Commission Design (LCD) principles. and the Great Lakes Water Collaborating with a broad Quality Agreement. range of stakeholders that in- cludes federal, state, and local andusky Bay encom- With grant funding from agencies within three counties; S passes 64 square miles the Ohio Department of scientists from local academic of open water along the Natural Resources, the institutions; NGOs; practitio- southern shore of Lake Erie City of Sandusky, launched ners; and private sector part- and receives runoff from the Sandusky Bay Strategic ners, Biohabitats is assessing nearly one million acres of Restoration Initiative (SBSRI), and analyzing proposed sites, land. A major commercial and an implementation plan for a setting goals, and prioritizing recreational hub for northern portfolio of projects designed restoration projects to create Ohio, this unique bay ecosys- to enhance the quality of life a strategic restoration imple- tem holds some of the most for the entire region, maxi- mentation plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Lighthouses – Clippings
    GREAT LAKES MARINE COLLECTION MILWAUKEE PUBLIC LIBRARY/WISCONSIN MARINE HISTORICAL SOCIETY MARINE SUBJECT FILES LIGHTHOUSE CLIPPINGS Current as of November 7, 2018 LIGHTHOUSE NAME – STATE - LAKE – FILE LOCATION Algoma Pierhead Light – Wisconsin – Lake Michigan - Algoma Alpena Light – Michigan – Lake Huron - Alpena Apostle Islands Lights – Wisconsin – Lake Superior - Apostle Islands Ashland Harbor Breakwater Light – Wisconsin – Lake Superior - Ashland Ashtabula Harbor Light – Ohio – Lake Erie - Ashtabula Badgeley Island – Ontario – Georgian Bay, Lake Huron – Badgeley Island Bailey’s Harbor Light – Wisconsin – Lake Michigan – Bailey’s Harbor, Door County Bailey’s Harbor Range Lights – Wisconsin – Lake Michigan – Bailey’s Harbor, Door County Bala Light – Ontario – Lake Muskoka – Muskoka Lakes Bar Point Shoal Light – Michigan – Lake Erie – Detroit River Baraga (Escanaba) (Sand Point) Light – Michigan – Lake Michigan – Sand Point Barber’s Point Light (Old) – New York – Lake Champlain – Barber’s Point Barcelona Light – New York – Lake Erie – Barcelona Lighthouse Battle Island Lightstation – Ontario – Lake Superior – Battle Island Light Beaver Head Light – Michigan – Lake Michigan – Beaver Island Beaver Island Harbor Light – Michigan – Lake Michigan – St. James (Beaver Island Harbor) Belle Isle Lighthouse – Michigan – Lake St. Clair – Belle Isle Bellevue Park Old Range Light – Michigan/Ontario – St. Mary’s River – Bellevue Park Bete Grise Light – Michigan – Lake Superior – Mendota (Bete Grise) Bete Grise Bay Light – Michigan – Lake Superior
    [Show full text]
  • Morphometric Factors in the Formation of Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands C
    P1: GIM TJ1095-03 TJ-AEM.cls May 27, 2004 9:29 Morphometric factors in the formation of Great Lakes coastal wetlands C. E. Herdendorf Department of Geological Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA; E-mail: [email protected] The Great Lakes basins were carved from ancient river valleys by continental ice sheets that receded from the region less than 10,000 years ago. Not only did the glaciers create the basins now holding the lakes, but they are responsible for many of the shallow depressions in the coastal margin that have since developed as coastal wetlands of various types. For the past four thousand years, coastal processes in the lakes have further modified the shore topography to form embayments, coastal lagoons, estuaries, deltas, and solution basins where thousands of hectares of wetlands have become established. This paper will explore the origin of the various morphometric forms which these wetlands have taken and their characteristic hydrologic processes. Keywords: estuaries, geomorphology, karst, lacustrine, palustrine, physiography Physiography of the Great Lakes gin of the waning ice sheet retreated northward into the newly carved lake basins, some of which were dammed The five adjoining Laurentian Great Lakes— by glacial end moraines. The early ice-margin lakes ex- Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario—extend panded as the glacial ice masses shrank. However, as 1,370 km from westernmost point to easternmost point new and lower outlets were uncovered to the north, the and 1,130 km from north to south (Figure 1). With lakes drained to ever lowering levels except during peri- a total surface area of 244,160 km2, this is the largest ods of minor readvances of the ice front (Hough, 1962).
    [Show full text]
  • Rehabilitating Great Lakes Ecosystems
    REHABILITATING GREAT LAKES ECOSYSTEMS edited by GEORGE R. FRANCIS Faculty of Environmental Studies University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 JOHN J. MAGNUSON Laboratory of Limnology University of Wisconsin-Madison Madison, Wisconsin 53706 HENRY A. REGIER Institute for Environmental Studies University of Toronto Toronto. Ontario M5S 1A4 and DANIEL R. TALHELM Department of Fish and Wildlife Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48824 TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 37 Great Lakes Fishery Commission 1451 Green Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 December 1979 CONTENTS Executive summary.. .......................................... 1 Preface and acknowledgements ................................. 2 1. Background and overview of study ........................... 6 Approach to the study. .................................... 10 Some basic terminology ................................... 12 Rehabilitation images ...................................... 15 2. Lake ecology, historical uses and consequences ............... 16 Early information sources. ................................. 17 Original condition ......................................... 18 Human induced changes in Great Lakes ecosystems ......... 21 Conclusion ............................................. ..3 0 3. Rehabilitation methods ...................................... 30 Fishing and other harvesting ............................... 31 Introductions and invasions of exotics ...................... 33 Microcontaminants: toxic wastes and biocides ............... 34 Nutrients and eutrophication
    [Show full text]
  • Hartig Et Al. 2007. Indicator Project
    Cover photos: Landsat 7 satellite image of western Lake Erie Basin and Detroit River corridor provided by USGS Landsat Project; Upper left: angler with walleye (Sander vitreus) by Jim Barta; Middle left: lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) by Glenn Ogilvie; Lower left: Hexagenia by Lynda Corkum; Center: lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) by James Boase/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Lower right: juvenile peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) by Craig Koppie/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Bottom left: bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) by Steve Maslowski/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. STATE OF THE STRAIT STATUS AND TRENDS OF KEY INDICATORS Edited by: John H. Hartig, Michael A. Zarull, Jan J.H. Ciborowski, John E. Gannon, Emily Wilke, Greg Norwood, and Ashlee Vincent 2007 STATE OF THE STRAIT STATUS AND TRENDS OF KEY INDICATORS 2007 Edited by: John H. Hartig, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Michael A. Zarull, Environment Canada Jan J.H. Ciborowski, University of Windsor John E. Gannon, International Joint Commission Emily Wilke, Southwest Michigan Land Conservancy Greg Norwood, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ashlee Vincent, University of Windsor Based on the Detroit River-Western Lake Erie Indicator Project, a three-year U.S.-Canada effort to compile and summarize long-term trend data, and the 2006 State of the Strait Conference held in Flat Rock, Michigan Suggested citation: Hartig, J.H., M.A. Zarull, J.J.H. Ciborowski, J.E. Gannon, E. Wilke, G. Norwood, and A. Vincent, eds. 2007. State of the Strait: Status and Trends of Key Indicators. Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research, Occasional Publication No.
    [Show full text]
  • 933-2966 Hulett I Sheet 5/5/09 1:41 PM Page 1
    933-2966 Hulett I sheet 5/5/09 1:41 PM Page 1 HO Scale Structure Kit 933-2966 HULETT UNLOADER Thanks for purchasing this Cornerstone Series® Missabe Range in the early 1890s. Vessels again Realizing that something had to be done the kit. All parts are styrene, so use compatible glue grew, reaching 475' (144.7m) by 1897. Once industry developed new methods to process and paint with your model. Please read these again, the stage was set for a new generation of taconite, introducing the first pellets in 1955. instructions and study the drawings before unloading machinery. starting. Huletts had no trouble handling the new marble- A radical new unloader appeared in 1899, the sized pellets — but neither did boats equipped While iron ore was discovered in Michigan’s brainchild of engineer George Hulett, on the with self-unloading machinery. First used on the upper peninsula in 1844, it took decades to docks of the Carnegie Steel Company in lakes in 1902, belt unloaders had proven well develop efficient ways to deliver it to eastern Conneaut, Ohio. Steam powered and rated at suited to coal and limestone, and allowed vessels furnaces by rail and water. In 1852, the first 275 tons per hour, the unit was constructed as an to unload quickly at virtually any desired large shipment, roughly 2 tons (1.8 MT), arrived experiment, but proved so successful that location. Natural ore had proved troublesome in Cleveland in barrels! But when the Sault St. additional examples were soon in use, and in with these units, and the general feeling was that Marie canal opened three years later, the stage 1904, the 540' (164.5m) long Augustus P.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan's Railroad History
    Contributing Organizations The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) wishes to thank the many railroad historical organizations and individuals who contributed to the development of this document, which will update continually. Ann Arbor Railroad Technical and Historical Association Blue Water Michigan Chapter-National Railway Historical Society Detroit People Mover Detroit Public Library Grand Trunk Western Historical Society HistoricDetroit.org Huron Valley Railroad Historical Society Lansing Model Railroad Club Michigan Roundtable, The Lexington Group in Transportation History Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers Michigan Railroads Association Peaker Services, Inc. - Brighton, Michigan Michigan Railroad History Museum - Durand, Michigan The Michigan Railroad Club The Michigan State Trust for Railroad Preservation The Southern Michigan Railroad Society S O October 13, 2014 Dear Michigan Residents: For more than 180 years, Michigan’s railroads have played a major role in the economic development of the state. This document highlights many important events that have occurred in the evolution of railroad transportation in Michigan. This document was originally published to help celebrate Michigan’s 150th birthday in 1987. A number of organizations and individuals contributed to its development at that time. The document has continued to be used by many since that time, so a decision was made to bring it up to date and keep the information current. Consequently, some 28 years later, the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has updated the original document and is placing it on our website for all to access. As you journey through this history of railroading in Michigan, may you find the experience both entertaining and beneficial. MDOT is certainly proud of Michigan’s railroad heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • Chocolay Township History Then And
    n ... I ' J r ' l r ' r ) J l I : J J; J' ' J. On the cover: this photograph was taken on top of the "Rock Cut" on March 6, 2008 at 11 :00 a.m. by Tom Shaw. In response to why this place, Tom answered: "Exercise, fresh air, beauty, quiet time with Him, to step back and look at the big picture and because I can. The best short answer is that I love it. The view brings me back to simpler times." CHOCOLAY TOWNSHIP . .. Just the combination of those two words CHOCOLAY TOWNSHIP brings some vision to your mind. It may be the one on the cover of this booklet or any of the various scenes throughout the other pages. All of them are special to someone, but whatever picture comes to your mind and the fact that you are reading this booklet reinforces that this is a special place for you. As you read this historical writing, I just want to join you in thanking the dozens of people who made it possible. First the township board located a woman, Elizabeth Delene who had the gift for writing and arranging the many contributions that came her way. Elizabeth, thank you for making the time to put these facts in a very readable form! Next on the list of volunteers is Cathy Phelps from the township office. She went above and beyond the call of duty to solicit information and assist Elizabeth in putting together this manuscript. A local committee of Lula Sarka, Elry Reetz, Marilyn Heitman, and Ben Mukkala were ever ready to assist joined together to read the facts, and add comments and reach out for additional information to make this a factual, fascinating piece.
    [Show full text]