DOCSLIB.ORG

Pioneers the Old Settler's Memorial Monument Ass'n, Inc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pioneers the Old Settler's Memorial Monument Ass'n, Inc PIONEERS THE OLD SETTLER'S MEMORIAL MONUMENT ASS'N, INC. PRESENTS A LOOK INTO THE PAST S Ml • OLD SETTI I ', |N( MAnHllii I^TTXT: North Oakote State Library 604 E Etoulevard Avenue Siimarck, ND 58505-0800 Ct ^ ^IbedicaJf&n { ) To the sturdy, resourceful pioneers who came from all parts of the world, and transformed a raw prairie into thriving communities of pro­ ductivity and hope. "Where once slow creeping glaciers passed Resistless o'er a frozen waste, Deep rooted in virgin mould The dower of centuries untold." We gratefully dedicate this historical book. 1 ••' .. >J<r.4r* "•• • -4 •» ri , ••« FOREWORD We have attempted to cover at least a small portion of the territory along both sides of the Red River, with brief biographies and pictures of early settlers. At this late date we are sure that you will realize the utter impossibility of doing justice to the subject. The pioneers came, settled, developed, and left the results of years of effort and determination. On the rich virgin soil of the great states of Minnesota and North Dakota they erected homes, schools, and churches. They built roads and bridges. They left a heritage to their descendants of which we can all be proud. This book will cover more than one hundred years, and if in reading it, the children of today and the children of tomorrow will better understand the area history, then our ef­ forts will have not been in vain. «fc'J *- . iff r History of the old log cabin. This log cabin was built by and was the home of Ole O. Esten­ son, from 1871 the year it was built until 1880, when Mr, Estenson built a larger log house consisting of two rooms and an upstairs. The first one was 13 x 13 and stood on the Esten­ son farm until 1956 (Vineland Township, Polk County) when it was moved to the old "Frog Point" site on the Dakota side of the river. It is now the property of the Old Settlers Memo­ rial Association. Here it stands as a memorial to the pioneers who built it. THE RED RIVER OF THE NORTH The Red River of the North has its beginning as a Freighter" at St. Paul, and took it up the Minnesota river at junction of the streams, Bois de Sioux and the River." Ottertail. This point is at Breckenridge, Minnesota, with The boat was afterwards sold by the sheriff and J. C. Wahpeton, North Dakota on the west bank. The source Burbank became the purchaser. The steamer was 125 of the river is, therefore, the source of the two streams feet long with a displacement of 200 tons. mentioned. The Bois de Sioux has its beginning at Lake The machinery of the "freighter" was also purchased Traverse, Minnesota and the Ottertail rises at Elbow by J. C. Burbank, and hauled overland to Georgetown Lake, Minnesota. on the Red River, where it was installed in a new steam­ Concerning the earliest navigation of the Red River, er called "International." The machinery was hauled to we know very little except that the early voyagers speak Georgetown in the winter of 1860. The "International" of the river and the canoe trade carried on by Indians hulk was completed in 1861 and launched in the spring who inhabited the area. In the journals of Lord Selkirk's of 1862. The new boat was longer than the "Freighter" settlement at lower Fort Garry may be found an account (137 feet) but with less displacement (133 tons). The of the purchase of the Red River Colony of seed grain at reason for this was that the new boat was built to skim Prairie Du Chien, Wisconsin. The grain was transported over shallow water. in Mackinaw boats down a tributary to the Mississippi, Burbank found that The Hudson Bay Company fur­ up the Mississippi to the Minnesota River and then up nished most of the shipping both up and down the river, that river to its source at Lake Traverse. and to compete with this trust was a losing proposition. While both the Minnesota River and the Red River Accordingly, he sold the "International" to the Hudson have their sources in the same chain of lakes, yet, there Bay Company in 1864. The last trip made by this steam­ never was, nor is there now any communication between er under the ownership of Burbank was made in 1863 the two, except in times when melting snow or rains pro­ when Captain Barrett brought her up from Fort Garry. duce a sufficient freshet to create a stream between the This account of the "Freighter" converted into the two. "International" is not an account of the first steamboat The Selkirk settlement shipment of grain, after arriv­ to ply the waters of the Red River, but the "Internation­ ing at the source of the river, was hauled overland across al" is mentioned at this point because the attempt to put the landlocked connection, thence by water down the the "Freighter" on the Red River was made in June Bois de Sioux to the Red River. The transportation of 1858. this grain was in 1820 and appears to be the first attempt The first steamboat to actually steam through the wa­ of white men to use the Red River as a means of busi­ ters of the Red River was the "Anson Northrup" and ness communications. For the next thirty-seven years this boat accomplished this feat May 26, 1859. The "Sel­ there is no record of any further attempts to commercial­ kirk" was built by James J. Hill, Alexander Griggs, and ly navigate the Red River. associates at McCauleyville in the winter of 1870-71. It John B. Davis of St. Paul owned a steamboat which was 110 feet long with a draft of 3 feet and a capacity he operated on the Mississippi north of St. Anthony of 120 tons. Here it will be noted that while the depth Falls. This boat was called the "Freighter." In the spring of the "International" was 5 J/2 feet, this boat had a of 1859 an attempt was made to run this boat up the depth of 3 feet and navigated much more easily in shal­ Minnesota River, and at the portage, time the voyage to low water. take advantage of the freshets usually due at that season The "Pioneer" was nothing more or less than the old of the year. Everything went as planned until the boat "International" rebuilt in 1860. arrived at a point somewhat over halfway across the In 1872 the Hudson's Bay and the Hill Griggs inter­ portage, when the man at the wheel mistook the waters ests were merged into one company called the Red River in a deep coulee for the main channel and ran the boat Transportation Company. When this merger took place up this false channel for a few rods where it grounded. the new company had two boats, the "Pioneer" and the C. B. Thiemens was master of the boat. A Welshman "Selkirk." The new concern then built the "Dakota" was left in charge of the boat and he remained there for and the "Alpha" at Breckenridge, the first being built in four years without supplies except such as he could the winter of 1871-72 and the latter in the winter of gather from the wild game of the neighborhood. 1873-74. The same winter the company built the "Chey­ There are many conflicting reports as to who tried to enne" at Grand Forks. put this boat into the Red River. George B. Winship, After this merger, the freight rates were raised and the noted editor of the Grand Forks Herald, says "Captain business men of Winnipeg resented this tightly organized Russell Blakely and others bought this steamer, "The monopoly. Having petitioned the Red River Transporta- tion Company for lower rates with no satisfactory results, ended its days. the business men decided to build their own line of In addition, a number of other boats had short stays steamboats. Accordingly, in 1875 two boats were built at on the river: The "Pluck," built at Brainard and shipped Fargo. The "Minnesota" and the "Manitoba." After to Fargo, in 1879-80; The "W. H. "Alsop" built at Moor­ making two trips the "Minnesota" was rammed and head in 1881 and operated until 1886; The "Fram" sunk by a boat belonging to the Red River Transporta­ which operated many years on the Red Lake River above tion Co. (this was reported as an accident, but the cir­ Crookston, was knocked down, shipped overland, and cumstances are not altogether clear whether it actually rebuilt at Grand Forks in 1895. was an accident). Becoming discouraged with their ven­ All of these boats were doomed on the Red River just ture in transportation, the business men of Winnipeg sold as river transportation on the Mississippi was doomed by the remaining boat, the "Manitoba" to the Hill, Hud­ the coming of the railroads. son's Bay interests, and thus the first attempt to break While some of these historic boats struggled along in up a monopoly in the Northwest, ended in failure. river transportation, and were in some instances dis­ The Grandin Brothers, large farm operators in the mantled and their machinery placed in other boats on Red River Valley, built the "J. L. Grandin" at Fargo in different rivers, all came to the same end—the railroads 1878, and it was operated exclusively by the Grandin had won the battle of transportation. Brothers in transporting grain grown along the Red Riv­ Actually the Transportation business on the Red Riv- er to Moorhead, Minnesota.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Penobscot Rivershed with Licensed Dischargers and Critical Salmon
    0# North West Branch St John T11 R15 WELS T11 R17 WELS T11 R16 WELS T11 R14 WELS T11 R13 WELS T11 R12 WELS T11 R11 WELS T11 R10 WELS T11 R9 WELS T11 R8 WELS Aroostook River Oxbow Smith Farm DamXW St John River T11 R7 WELS Garfield Plt T11 R4 WELS Chapman Ashland Machias River Stream Carry Brook Chemquasabamticook Stream Squa Pan Stream XW Daaquam River XW Whitney Bk Dam Mars Hill Squa Pan Dam Burntland Stream DamXW Westfield Prestile Stream Presque Isle Stream FRESH WAY, INC Allagash River South Branch Machias River Big Ten Twp T10 R16 WELS T10 R15 WELS T10 R14 WELS T10 R13 WELS T10 R12 WELS T10 R11 WELS T10 R10 WELS T10 R9 WELS T10 R8 WELS 0# MARS HILL UTILITY DISTRICT T10 R3 WELS Water District Resevoir Dam T10 R7 WELS T10 R6 WELS Masardis Squapan Twp XW Mars Hill DamXW Mule Brook Penobscot RiverYosungs Lakeh DamXWed0# Southwest Branch St John Blackwater River West Branch Presque Isle Strea Allagash River North Branch Blackwater River East Branch Presque Isle Strea Blaine Churchill Lake DamXW Southwest Branch St John E Twp XW Robinson Dam Prestile Stream S Otter Brook L Saint Croix Stream Cox Patent E with Licensed Dischargers and W Snare Brook T9 R8 WELS 8 T9 R17 WELS T9 R16 WELS T9 R15 WELS T9 R14 WELS 1 T9 R12 WELS T9 R11 WELS T9 R10 WELS T9 R9 WELS Mooseleuk Stream Oxbow Plt R T9 R13 WELS Houlton Brook T9 R7 WELS Aroostook River T9 R4 WELS T9 R3 WELS 9 Chandler Stream Bridgewater T T9 R5 WELS TD R2 WELS Baker Branch Critical UmScolcus Stream lmon Habitat Overlay South Branch Russell Brook Aikens Brook West Branch Umcolcus Steam LaPomkeag Stream West Branch Umcolcus Stream Tie Camp Brook Soper Brook Beaver Brook Munsungan Stream S L T8 R18 WELS T8 R17 WELS T8 R16 WELS T8 R15 WELS T8 R14 WELS Eagle Lake Twp T8 R10 WELS East Branch Howe Brook E Soper Mountain Twp T8 R11 WELS T8 R9 WELS T8 R8 WELS Bloody Brook Saint Croix Stream North Branch Meduxnekeag River W 9 Turner Brook Allagash Stream Millinocket Stream T8 R7 WELS T8 R6 WELS T8 R5 WELS Saint Croix Twp T8 R3 WELS 1 Monticello R Desolation Brook 8 St Francis Brook TC R2 WELS MONTICELLO HOUSING CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • State:Alabama ---Incomelimit S
    STATE:ALABAMA ---------------------------INCOMELIMITS---------------------------- PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON Anniston-Oxford, AL MSA FY 2013 MFI: 53100 30% OF MEDIAN 11200 12800 14400 15950 17250 18550 19800 21100 VERY LOW INCOME 18600 21250 23900 26550 28700 30800 32950 35050 LOW-INCOME 29750 34000 38250 42500 45900 49300 52700 56100 Auburn-Opelika, AL MSA FY 2013 MFI: 63000 30% OF MEDIAN 13250 15150 17050 18900 20450 21950 23450 24950 VERY LOW INCOME 22050 25200 28350 31500 34050 36550 39100 41600 LOW-INCOME 35300 40350 45400 50400 54450 58500 62500 66550 Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA Birmingham-Hoover, AL HMFA FY 2013 MFI: 57100 30% OF MEDIAN 12550 14350 16150 17900 19350 20800 22200 23650 VERY LOW INCOME 20900 23900 26900 29850 32250 34650 37050 39450 LOW-INCOME 33450 38200 43000 47750 51600 55400 59250 63050 Chilton County, AL HMFA FY 2013 MFI: 52000 30% OF MEDIAN 10950 12500 14050 15600 16850 18100 19350 20600 VERY LOW INCOME 18200 20800 23400 26000 28100 30200 32250 34350 LOW-INCOME 29150 33300 37450 41600 44950 48300 51600 54950 Walker County, AL HMFA FY 2013 MFI: 41400 30% OF MEDIAN 9750 11150 12550 13900 15050 16150 17250 18350 VERY LOW INCOME 16250 18550 20850 23150 25050 26900 28750 30600 LOW-INCOME 25950 29650 33350 37050 40050 43000 45950 48950 Columbus, GA-AL MSA FY 2013 MFI: 48200 30% OF MEDIAN 10450 11950 13450 14900 16100 17300 18500 19700 VERY LOW INCOME 17400 19900 22400 24850 26850 28850 30850 32850 LOW-INCOME 27900 31850 35850 39800 43000 46200 49400 52550 Decatur,
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo Salar)
    Final Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Approved: Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Date NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate actions that are thought to be necessary to recover andlor protect endangered species. Recovery plans are prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies and others. This Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) was prepared by the staff of the Northeast Regional Offices of NMFS with the assistance of the FWS and the Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission (ASC). While the State of Maine provided recommendations for this plan, it was developed using federal guidelines and policies pertaining to recovery plans for federally listed species. Recovery plans are not regulatory or decision documents. The recommendations in a recovery plan are not considered final decisions unless and until they are actually proposed for implementation. Objectives will only be attained and hnds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities and other budgetary constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Penobscot Bay Watch
    PENOBSCOTBAY Maine National Estuary Program Nomination STATE OF MAINE OFFICEOF THE GOVERNOR AUGUSTA. MAINE 04333 ANGUS S. KING, JR. GOVERNOR March 6, 1995 Administrator Carol Browner US. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M. Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Ms. Browner: 1 am pleased to submit a State of Maine Conference Agreement that nominates Penobscot Bay for designation in the National Estuary Program. The Agreement describes the Bay's key issues and actions to respond to them, how we will continue to involve the public in developing and implementing solutions to these most pressing issues, and how we propose to finance this estuary project. Our nomination for Penobscot Bay is consistent with EPA's December; 1994 guidance that calls for considerable initiative by a state before requesting designation. Public and private entities have worked cooperatively since 1992 and made remarkable progress. Two major conferences have brought together all levels of government, the nonprofit community, Bay businesses and the public to talk openly about key issues and possible solutions. These and other activities described in the attached document have laid a solid foundation for a successful national estuaq project. I believe our estuary project will be successfully implemented because of the active participation of five state agencies over the past three years. These agencies (the Departments of Environmental Protection, Marine Resources, Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Economic and Community Developmenf and the State Planning Office) are committed to this project and I am confident that in concert with our nonprofit, municipal and business partners we will m&e important strides to protect and restore Penobscot Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Crop Year Secretarial Disaster Designations
    Secretarial Disaster Designations - 2017 Crop Year All Drought - Total Counties by State (updated 5/23/2018) Primary Contiguous Primary Contiguous State/Territory Counties Counties State/Territory Counties Counties Alabama 67 0 Nebraska 0 10 Alaska 0 0 Nevada 2 6 Arizona 5 6 New Hampshire 0 0 Arkansas 22 21 New Jersey 0 0 California 35 9 New Mexico 0 2 Colorado 4 18 New York 0 0 Connecticut 0 3 North Carolina 9 12 Delaware 0 0 North Dakota 47 6 Florida 35 17 Ohio 0 0 Georgia 122 25 Oklahoma 51 16 Hawaii 3 1 Oregon 0 0 Idaho 3 4 Pennsylvania 0 0 Illinois 0 0 Puerto Rico 0 0 Indiana 0 0 Rhode Island 0 0 Iowa 19 14 South Carolina 16 6 Kansas 15 24 South Dakota 37 13 Kentucky 0 12 Tennessee 66 14 Louisiana 0 9 Texas 18 30 Maine 0 0 Utah 2 7 Maryland 0 0 Vermont 0 0 Massachusetts 1 3 Virgin Islands of the U.S. 0 0 Michigan 0 0 Virginia 1 6 Minnesota 0 7 Washington 0 2 Mississippi 69 10 West Virginia 0 1 Missouri 0 11 Wisconsin 0 0 Montana 42 11 Wyoming 2 6 Total 693 342 1 2017 All Drought - Primary and Contiguous Counties (updated 5/23/2018) State/Territory Primary County St/Co FIPS Code Alabama Autauga 01001 Alabama Baldwin 01003 Alabama Barbour 01005 Alabama Bibb 01007 Alabama Blount 01009 Alabama Bullock 01011 Alabama Butler 01013 Alabama Calhoun 01015 Alabama Chambers 01017 Alabama Cherokee 01019 Alabama Chilton 01021 Alabama Choctaw 01023 Alabama Clarke 01025 Alabama Clay 01027 Alabama Cleburne 01029 Alabama Coffee 01031 Alabama Colbert 01033 Alabama Conecuh 01035 Alabama Coosa 01037 Alabama Covington 01039 Alabama Crenshaw 01041 Alabama
    [Show full text]
  • The Pacific Coast and the Casual Labor Economy, 1919-1933
    © Copyright 2015 Alexander James Morrow i Laboring for the Day: The Pacific Coast and the Casual Labor Economy, 1919-1933 Alexander James Morrow A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2015 Reading Committee: James N. Gregory, Chair Moon-Ho Jung Ileana Rodriguez Silva Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of History ii University of Washington Abstract Laboring for the Day: The Pacific Coast and the Casual Labor Economy, 1919-1933 Alexander James Morrow Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor James Gregory Department of History This dissertation explores the economic and cultural (re)definition of labor and laborers. It traces the growing reliance upon contingent work as the foundation for industrial capitalism along the Pacific Coast; the shaping of urban space according to the demands of workers and capital; the formation of a working class subject through the discourse and social practices of both laborers and intellectuals; and workers’ struggles to improve their circumstances in the face of coercive and onerous conditions. Woven together, these strands reveal the consequences of a regional economy built upon contingent and migratory forms of labor. This workforce was hardly new to the American West, but the Pacific Coast’s reliance upon contingent labor reached its apogee after World War I, drawing hundreds of thousands of young men through far flung circuits of migration that stretched across the Pacific and into Latin America, transforming its largest urban centers and working class demography in the process. The presence of this substantial workforce (itinerant, unattached, and racially heterogeneous) was out step with the expectations of the modern American worker (stable, married, and white), and became the warrant for social investigators, employers, the state, and other workers to sharpen the lines of solidarity and exclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternatives Evaluation Report: Penobscot River Phase III
    ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION REPORT Penobscot River Phase III Engineering Study Penobscot River Estuary, Maine Prepared for: United States District Court District of Maine Prepared by: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 511 Congress Street, Suite 200 Portland, Maine 04101 Project No. 3616166052 September 2018 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION REPORT Penobscot River Phase III Engineering Study Penobscot River Estuary, Maine Prepared for: United States District Court District of Maine Prepared by: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 511 Congress Street, Suite 200 Portland, Maine 04101 Project No. 3616166052 September 2018 _____________________ __________________ Nelson Walter, P.E. Eugene Shephard, P.E. Principal Project Manager Associate Engineer US District Court – District of Maine Alternatives Evaluation Report Penobscot River Phase III Engineering Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In January 2016, the United States District Court for the District of Maine (the Court) selected Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (Amec Foster Wheeler) to conduct the Penobscot River Phase III Engineering Study (Phase III Engineering Study), to identify and evaluate feasible, effective and cost-effective measures to remediate mercury in the Penobscot River Estuary (the Estuary). The geographic area to be addressed within the Phase III Engineering Study is described by the Court as “the region from the site of the former Veazie Dam south to Upper Penobscot Bay, including Mendall Marsh and the Orland River." Beginning in 1967, a chlor-alkali facility located in Orrington, Maine released mercury into the Estuary. Releases of mercury at overall declining concentrations continued throughout facility operation and ceased with facility closure in 2000. In 2002, the Court ordered an independent scientific study, the Penobscot River Mercury Study, to assess the spatial distribution and impact of mercury discharge in the Penobscot River.
    [Show full text]
  • Number of Medicare FFS Emergency Transport Claims by State and County Or Equivalent Entity, 2017
    Number of Medicare FFS Emergency Transport Claims by State, 2017 STATE/TERRITORY CLAIM COUNT ALABAMA 171,482 ALASKA 14,631 ARIZONA 140,516 ARKANSAS 122,909 CALIFORNIA 788,350 COLORADO 105,617 CONNECTICUT 152,831 DELAWARE 47,239 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 25,593 FLORIDA 637,127 GEORGIA 289,687 GUAM 2,338 HAWAII 19,028 IDAHO 35,581 ILLINOIS 419,315 INDIANA 229,877 IOWA 104,965 KANSAS 92,760 KENTUCKY 184,636 LOUISIANA 163,083 MAINE 72,731 MARYLAND 194,231 MASSACHUSETTS 318,382 MICHIGAN 327,029 MINNESOTA 146,030 MISSISSIPPI 141,840 MISSOURI 222,075 MONTANA 26,943 NEBRASKA 49,449 NEVADA 75,571 NEW HAMPSHIRE 57,423 NEW JERSEY 315,471 NEW MEXICO 55,554 NEW YORK 493,291 NORTH CAROLINA 418,959 NORTH DAKOTA 21,502 NORTHERN MARIANAS 826 STATE/TERRITORY CLAIM COUNT OHIO 390,605 OKLAHOMA 150,046 OREGON 98,867 PENNSYLVANIA 391,482 PUERTO RICO 7,769 RHODE ISLAND 40,743 SOUTH CAROLINA 219,186 SOUTH DAKOTA 26,748 TENNESSEE 237,657 TEXAS 629,151 UTAH 32,309 VERMONT 29,689 VIRGIN ISLANDS 1,577 VIRGINIA 271,194 WASHINGTON 179,466 WEST VIRGINIA 93,968 WISCONSIN 158,239 WYOMING 17,357 Number of Medicare FFS Emergency Transport Claims by State and County or Equivalent Entity, 2017 STATE/TERRITORY COUNTY/EQUIVALENT CLAIM COUNT ALABAMA Autauga 1,326 ALABAMA Baldwin 7,050 ALABAMA Barbour 1,256 ALABAMA Bibb 429 ALABAMA Blount 1,372 ALABAMA Bullock 246 ALABAMA Butler 1,058 ALABAMA Calhoun 5,975 ALABAMA Chambers 1,811 ALABAMA Cherokee 885 ALABAMA Chilton 1,298 ALABAMA Choctaw 777 ALABAMA Clarke 980 ALABAMA Clay 491 ALABAMA Cleburne 628 ALABAMA Coffee 1,941 ALABAMA Colbert
    [Show full text]
  • Phase II Report Chapter 14. Temporal and Geographic Trends in Mercury
    PENOBSCOT RIVER MERCURY STUDY Chapter 14 Temporal and geographic trends in mercury in biota in the Penobscot estuary Submitted to Judge John Woodcock United States District Court (District of Maine) April 2013 By A.D. Kopec1 and R.A. Bodaly1 1. Penobscot River Mercury Study Fish and Shellfish Collections Kimberley Payne, Rick Simmons, Marcia Bowen, Corey Francis, Chuck Porembski, Ethan Sobo, Steve Lee, Sheila and Mike Dassatt Normandeau Associates, Inc. 8 Fundy Road Falmouth, Maine 04105 Bird and Mammal Collections Oksana Lane, David Evers, Lucas Savoy, Wing Goodale, David Yates Biodiversity Research Institute 652 Maine Street Gorham, Maine 04038 Black Duck Collections Kelsey Sullivan, Brad Allen, Houston Cady Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Bangor Research Office 650 State Street Bangor, Maine 04401 1 SUMMARY Mercury (Hg) concentrations in fish, birds and bats were monitored between 2006 and 2010 in the lower Penobscot River, upper Penobscot Bay and in upstream and coastal reference sites. The monitoring study was designed to examine trends in Hg concentrations over time, the geographic pattern of Hg contamination in relation to the HoltraChem site, health threats created by the Hg contamination, and the severity of the contamination in comparison to other sites sampled throughout the world. Note that the current four to five-year monitoring period is insufficient to determine long-term trends in the region. The presence or absence of significant trends in Hg concentrations over time is relevant only for the current monitoring period. Between 2006 and 2010 we found significant variation in Hg concentrations at a few sites, but no overall trends in most species of biota, including fish (American eels, tomcod, rainbow smelt, winter flounder), lobster, and birds (Nelson’s sparrow, song sparrow, swamp sparrow, red-winged blackbird, Virginia rail).
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Estuaries Project
    Massachusetts Estuaries Project Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Slocum’s and Little River Estuaries, Dartmouth, MA University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Massachusetts Department of School of Marine Science and Technology Environmental Protection FINAL REPORT – December 2008 Massachusetts Estuaries Project Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Slocum’s and Little River Estuaries, Dartmouth, MA FINAL REPORT – December 2008 Brian Howes Tony Millham Roland Samimy David Schlezinger John Ramsey Trey Ruthven Ed Eichner Contributors: US Geological Survey Don Walters and John Masterson Applied Coastal Research and Engineering, Inc. Elizabeth Hunt and Sean W. Kelley Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Charles Costello and Brian Dudley SMAST Coastal Systems Program Jennifer Benson, Michael Bartlett, Sara Sampieri, and Elizabeth White Lloyd Center for the Environment Mark Mello Cape Cod Commission Xiaotong Wu © [2007] University of Massachusetts All Rights Reserved ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Massachusetts Estuaries Project Technical Team would like to acknowledge the contributions of the many individuals who have worked tirelessly for the restoration and protection of the critical coastal resources of the Slocum's and Little River Estuaries and supported the application of the Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for these systems. Without these stewards and their efforts, this project would not have been possible. First and foremost we would like to recognize and applaud the significant time and effort in data collection and discussion spent by members of the Coalition for Buzzards Bay's BayWatcher, Water Quality Monitoring Program. These individuals gave of their time to consistent and sound nutrient related water quality from this system for over a decade.
    [Show full text]
  • 2001 Annual Report Maine Coast Heritage Trust Works
    2001 Annual Report Maine Coast Heritage Trust works to conserve coastal and other lands that define Maine’s distinct landscape, protect its environment, sustain its outdoor traditions and promote the well-being of its people. Since 1970, MCHT has helped to protect permanently more than 111,000 acres including valuable wildlife habitat, farm and forest land and 275 entire coastal islands. MCHT provides conservation services to landowners, local land trusts, government agencies and communities throughout Maine. As a membership organization, MCHT is supported by individuals committed to protecting Maine’s natural beauty and resources. The Trust invites your support and involvement. On the cover: Tinker Island, Blue Hill © Sara Gray 2001 Annual Report CHRIS HAMILTON North Haven PRESIDENT’S AND CHAIRMAN’S MESSAGE In August 2001, we announced our Campaign for the Coast – a $100 million campaign that seeks to preserve the best of Maine’s coast for generations to come. Recognizing the threats posed by increasing development, we committed to accelerating our work to conserve coastal islands and archipelagos, prominent hills and meadows, shore access, community open space and intact landscape features. Campaign Chairman Richard Rockefeller inspired us to launch this ambitious effort and has stood at the helm ever since. He leads by example – guiding us with keen perception, good humor and unflagging energy. The Campaign’s success to date is due – in no small part – to his integral involvement. Already the Campaign for the Coast has expanded the horizon of land conservation in Maine, enabling protection of lands that could never before have been preserved. Among the 36 projects completed in 2001 are some of the most innovative and complex ones in MCHT’s history.
    [Show full text]
  • The Industrial Workers of the World in the Seattle General Strike - Colin M
    The Industrial Workers of the World in the Seattle general strike - Colin M. Anderson An attempt to find out the IWW's actual involvement in the Seattle General Strike of 1919, which has been hampered by myths caused by the capitalist press and AFL union leaders of the time. The Seattle General Strike is an event very important in the history of the Pacific Northwest. On February 6, 1919 Seattle workers became the first workers in United States history to participate in an official general strike. Many people know little, if anything, about the strike, however. Perhaps the momentousness of the event is lost in the fact that the strike took place without violence, or perhaps it is because there was no apparent visible change in the city following the event. But the strike is a landmark for the U.S. labor movement, and is very important, if for no there reason, for what it stands for. Workers expressed their power through a massive action of solidarity, and demonstrated to the nation the potential power of organized labor. This was at a time when labor was generally divided over ideological lines that prevented them from achieving such mass action very often. For many at the time, however, the strike represented something else: something more sinister and extreme. To many of the locals in Seattle the strike was the beginning of an attempted revolution by the Industrial Workers of the World and others with similar radical tendencies. These people saw the putting down of the strike was the triumph of patriotism in the face of radicalism gone too far.
    [Show full text]