Mattaponi Indian Reservation King William County, Virginia Heritage

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Mattaponi Indian Reservation King William County, Virginia Heritage 1 CONTINUITY WITHIN CHANGE: VIRGINIA INDIANS NATIONAL REGISTER PROJECT UNDERREPRESENTED COMMUNITIES GRANT PROGRAM - HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND P15AP00020 Mattaponi Indian Reservation King William County, Virginia Heritage Properties of Indian Town: The Mattaponi Indian Baptist Church, School, and Homes of Chiefly Lineages October 2017 College of William & Mary Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Anthropology Department of Historic Resources Williamsburg, Virginia Richmond, Virginia Anthropological Research Report Series Research Report Series Number 7 Number 23 2 PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK 3 Mattaponi Indian Reservation King William County, Virginia Heritage Properties of Indian Town: The Mattaponi Indian Baptist Church, School, and Homes of Chiefly Lineages Authors Buck Woodard, Ph.D., Co-Principal Investigator Danielle Moretti-Langholtz, Ph.D., Co-Principal Investigator Contributors Martha McCartney Megan Victor, MA Nicholas Belluzzo, MA College of William & Mary Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Anthropology Department of Historic Resources Williamsburg, Virginia Richmond, Virginia Anthropological Research Report Series Research Report Series Number 7 Number 23 4 This material is based upon work assisted by a grant from the Underrepresented Communities Grant Program administered by the Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of the Interior. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 9–12 Methodology Field Visits to the Mattaponi Indian Reservation Civic-Engagement and Ethnography Archival and Historical Research II. THE MATTAPONI INDIANS’ EARLY HISTORY (BY MARTHA MCCARTNEY) 15–23 Early European Contact The Mattaponi Indians’ Territory, 1607-1610 The Spread of Settlement Expansion and Exclusion The 1646 Articles of Peace The Creation of Tribal Reserves The Mattaponi Make a Treaty Changes in English Policy Native Land Sales Bacon’s Rebellion and the Treaty of Middle Plantation Competition for Land III. INDIAN TOWN AND COUNTRY: NATIVE PLACEMAKING AND SETTLEMENTS 27–32 I V. LIFEWAYS ON THE MATTAPONI AND PAMUNKEY, C.1700-1800 33–43 Colonial-Era Native Dress Participation in the Market Economy Early Education and Christianity V. MATTAPONI TOWN, C.1800-1900 45–66 The Early Republic and Antebellum Era Settlement The American Civil War and Reconstruction Mattaponi Town at the End of the Nineteenth Century VI. MATTAPONI CHIEFS, INDIAN SCHOOL, AND INDIAN BAPTIST CHURCH, C.1880-1980 67–86 Chiefs and Headmen Heritage Properties of Community and Chiefly Lineages, c.1880-1950 The Allmond House The Langston House The King-Custalow House The O.T. Custalow House The Curtis Custalow House Mattaponi Education and Religion: Churches and Schools, c.1917-1966 The Mattaponi Indian School The Mattaponi Indian Baptist Church VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 87–88 WORKS CITED 89–101 APPENDIX I: HISTORICAL MATERIALS AND FIELDWORK PHOTOS 103–135 APPENDIX II: MATTAPONI HISTORIC DISTRICT SURVEY 137–154 6 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 7 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY The oral history of the Mattaponi people Places. The activity that is the subject of this report and the documentary record of the Mattaponi Indi- has been financed in part with federal funds from the an Reservation identify multiple historically signifi- National Park Service, U.S. Department of the In- cant heritage properties that reflect broad patterns terior. However, the contents and opinions do not of Native American history within the Common- necessarily reflect the views or policies of the De- wealth of Virginia. Surrounded by the Mattaponi partment of the Interior, nor does the mention of River and King William County, the Mattaponi Indi- trade names or commercial products constitute en- an Reservation is home to Algonquian descendants dorsement or recommendation by the Department of Tidewater’s indigenous peoples and is one of of the Interior. only two extant Native settlements that have been continuously occupied since colonial times. The res- Special thanks and recognition are in order ervation’s hamlet, historically called Indian Town, is for the Mattaponi Tribe, who completed a 2016 the location of the community’s Mattaponi Indian Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] with Baptist Church, their former Indian School, and the DHR in advance of the conducted research. Matta- residences of the tribe’s chiefly lineages. Through poni Chief Mark T. Custalow, Assistant Chief Leon the National Park Service’s Underrepresented Com- Custalow, and Julie V. Langan, State Historic Pres- munities Grant Program, and in collaboration with ervation Officer and Director, Virginia Department the state-recognized1 Mattaponi Indian Tribe, the of Historic Resources were signatories to the agree- Virginia Department of Historic Resources [DHR] ment. Mattaponi Tribal Reviewers Brandon Custa- seeks to identify, research, and nominate minority low, Mark T. Custalow, and Denise Custalow Davis populations’ historically significant locales to the offered guidance on the research report, with Coun- state and national registry of historic places. The cilman Brandon Custalow acting as liaison for the DHR project Continuity Within Change: Virginia Indi- project. Formal and informal individual and group ans National Register Project moves that effort forward, interviews and commentary, included members through an archival, ethnographic, and oral history listed above, as well as Christine Custalow, George investigation of the Mattaponi people, with atten- W. Custalow, J.V. Custalow, Peggy Custalow, Mark tion to the tribe’s historic church and school, and Custalow, and Susie Custalow. Other members of the pre-1950 residences of their tribal membership, the broader community, including Debbie Cook, including those of their chiefly lineages. This study, Cynthia Allmond Dunne, Lois Tupponce, and conducted by the Department of Anthropology’s Sheereen Waterlily, provided commentary on select American Indian Resource Center at the College of family histories and photographs. They are thanked William & Mary, provides the supporting materials for their contributions and service, and through ver- necessary for nominating historical Mattaponi heri- bal agreement and MOU, agreeing to share the oral tage properties to the National Register of Historic history of the Mattaponi people. 1 In 1983 The Virginia Legislature passed Joint Resolution 54, extending “state-recognition” to six tribes within the Common- wealth, which included the Mattaponi. However, through the tributary system, Virginia has acknowledged the Mattaponi tribe’s reservation lands and governing body since colonial times. The 1983 legislative recognition has remained a contentious topic for contemporary Mattaponi leaders, as their reservation land and annual tribute to the government of Virginia asserts their continuing sovereignty and treaty status. 8 CHAPTER ONE The Mattaponi are indigenous to the tide- Indian governments and territories as dependent water coastal plain of Virginia, and closely related sovereigns. As stipulated in this and earlier treaties, to the region’s other Algonquian speakers, including the Pamunkey and “severall scattered nations” un- the neighboring Chickahominy, Nansemond, Pa- der them were granted lands to inhabit within “Pa- munkey, Patawomeke, and Rappahannock. In his- munkey Neck” between the Mattaponi and Pamun- torical documents the community’s name appears in key rivers. These communities established multiple several forms, including “Mattapanient,” “Mattapo- “Indian Towns” within the confines of this geogra- ny” and “Mattaponie,” etc. The contemporary spell- phy, including settlements on the Mattaponi River. ing of the name “Mattaponi” has been in standard usage for over a hundred years, both for the name As with other nearby Native communities, of the community and the river. Collectively, the the Mattaponi River “Indian Town” became en- Algonquian speakers of the Chesapeake have been gaged in the agricultural cycles of the region and referred to in the historical literature and by scholars fully invested in the mercantile economy. Like the as the “Powhatan,” based on the seventeenth-centu- Indian settlements on the Pamunkey River, the Mat- ry chiefdom of which many of them were a part. As taponi River Indians became primarily market-based an outcome, confusion can exist about the use of watermen and farmers and developed a rural lifeway multiple terms to describe the Natives of the tide- similar to that of their non-Native neighbors. By the water; the Mattaponi and Pamunkey are both “Pow- nineteenth century, corn and fish were the major hatan,” and both riverine communities are “Algon- Mattaponi staples, alongside the adoption of animal quians.” It is evident from the historical record that husbandry. Christianity become a part of commu- the Mattaponi and Pamunkey riverine communities nity life in the eighteenth century, and eventually de- formed the polity known as the Powhatan chief- veloped into an affiliation with the Baptist Church. dom, alongside communities living on the upper By the beginning of the twentieth century, Virginia James [Powhatan] River. However, chiefly lineages funded separate schooling for the Mattaponi In- from Pamunkey were in power during the sixteenth dians, and upheld their tributary status and reser- and seventeenth centuries, which was the state of vation lands alongside the Pamunkey.
Recommended publications
  • Piedmont District Clubs by Counties
    Piedmont District of Virginia Federation of Garden Clubs Below is a list of member Garden Clubs by county or city. Location is listed by mailing address of club president. This is not necessarily representative of all club members nor necessarily where the club holds its meeting. However, this is a good approximation. Check clubs listed in neighboring counties and cities as well. If you are interested in contacting a club please send us an email from the ‘Contact’ page and someone will be in contact with you. Thank you! Clubs by Counties Amelia -Clay Spring GC Middlesex -Amelia County GC -Hanover Herb Guild -John Mitchell GC Arlington -Hanover Towne GC -Rock Spring GC -Newfound River GC New Kent Brunswick -Old Ivy GC -Hanover Towne GC Caroline -Pamunkey River GC Charles City -West Hanover GC Northumberland -Chesapeake Bay GC Chesterfield Henrico -Kilmarnock -Bon Air GC -Crown Grant GC -Rappahannock GC -Chester GC -Ginter Park GC -Crestwood Farms GC -Green Acres GC Nottoway -Glebe Point GC -Highland Springs GC -Crewe -Greenfield GC -Hillard Park GC -Midlothian GC -Northam GC Powhatan -Oxford GC - Richmond Designers’ -Powhatan - Richmond Designers’ Guild* Guild* -River Road GC Prince William -Salisbury GC -Roslyn Hills GC -Manassas GC -Stonehenge GC -Sleepy Hollow GC -Woodland Pond GC -Thomas Jefferson GC Prince George -Windsordale GC Richmond County Cumberland -Wyndham GC Southampton -Cartersville GC Spotsylvania Dinwiddie James City -Chancellor GC Essex King and Queen -Sunlight GC Fairfax King George Fluvanna King William Stafford -Fluvanna GC Lancaster Surry Goochland Louisa -Surry GC Greensville -Lake Anna GC Sussex -Sunlight GC Westmoreland Hanover Lunenburg -Westmoreland GC -Canterbury GC Page 1 of 2 *Members of Richmond Designers’ Guild are members of other garden clubs and are from all areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Finding
    This page is intentionally left blank. Pamunkey Indian Tribe (Petitioner #323) Proposed Finding Proposed Finding The Pamunkey Indian Tribe (Petitioner #323) TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1 Regulatory Procedures .............................................................................................1 Administrative History.............................................................................................2 The Historical Indian Tribe ......................................................................................4 CONCLUSIONS UNDER THE CRITERIA (25 CFR 83.7) ..............................................9 Criterion 83.7(a) .....................................................................................................11 Criterion 83.7(b) ....................................................................................................21 Criterion 83.7(c) .....................................................................................................57 Criterion 83.7(d) ...................................................................................................81 Criterion 83.7(e) ....................................................................................................87 Criterion 83.7(f) ...................................................................................................107
    [Show full text]
  • Potomac River Basin Assessment Overview
    Sources: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality PL01 Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Virginia Department of Transportation Potomac River Basin Virginia Geographic Information Network PL03 PL04 United States Geological Survey PL05 Winchester PL02 Monitoring Stations PL12 Clarke PL16 Ambient (120) Frederick Loudoun PL15 PL11 PL20 Ambient/Biological (60) PL19 PL14 PL23 PL08 PL21 Ambient/Fish Tissue (4) PL10 PL18 PL17 *# 495 Biological (20) Warren PL07 PL13 PL22 ¨¦§ PL09 PL24 draft; clb 060320 PL06 PL42 Falls ChurchArlington jk Citizen Monitoring (35) PL45 395 PL25 ¨¦§ 66 k ¨¦§ PL43 Other Non-Agency Monitoring (14) PL31 PL30 PL26 Alexandria PL44 PL46 WX Federal (23) PL32 Manassas Park Fairfax PL35 PL34 Manassas PL29 PL27 PL28 Fish Tissue (15) Fauquier PL47 PL33 PL41 ^ Trend (47) Rappahannock PL36 Prince William PL48 PL38 ! PL49 A VDH-BEACH (1) PL40 PL37 PL51 PL50 VPDES Dischargers PL52 PL39 @A PL53 Industrial PL55 PL56 @A Municipal Culpeper PL54 PL57 Interstate PL59 Stafford PL58 Watersheds PL63 Madison PL60 Impaired Rivers and Streams PL62 PL61 Fredericksburg PL64 Impaired Reservoirs or Estuaries King George PL65 Orange 95 ¨¦§ PL66 Spotsylvania PL67 PL74 PL69 Westmoreland PL70 « Albemarle PL68 Caroline PL71 Miles Louisa Essex 0 5 10 20 30 Richmond PL72 PL73 Northumberland Hanover King and Queen Fluvanna Goochland King William Frederick Clarke Sources: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Loudoun Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Virginia Department of Transportation Rappahannock River Basin
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Assessors R Complete!
    Ill •' \/ fc % i^lWv ^ Advertising Copy Must Reach Us WKfettii •••wm f*1'. • I Not Later Than Wednesday Noon. SHHI ^cai items Must Be Accompany " No Copy Will BB Accepted on j V; ied by the Sender's Correct Name' J |lp'?P TL 8LLAL,,: R ' and Must Reach Us Before 3 P. f "" S m. ® I M. Wednesday. THE OHIY NEWSPAPER PRINTED IN THE TOWN OF ENFIELD; COVERS MORE THAN TWENTY-TWO SUBIJRBAN ^DISTRICTS, COMBINING A POPUUJION OF MGRE THAN 25,000 BETWEEN HARTFORD ym.- AND SPRINGFIELD-IT PAYS TO ADVERTISE IN IT ESTABLISHED 1880 THOMPSONVIUiE, CONNECTICUT, THURSDAY, JANUARY 1922 Single Copy 5 Cents VOL. XXXXII., Board of Assessors r Progress Being Made New Police Planning Work For y:--. ; vjESt.<u«r:<- In "White Way" Plans Wilson Foundation •/VSJ Committee of the Board of Trade Complete! Its Work Appointed For This Purpose Meet Head Named Public Meeting May Be Held To and Make Considerable Headway Inaugurate the Locul Caiiijiaign With the Project of Installing For the Conununitys Part in the For Retail Ornamental Lights in the Busi­ AVoodrow Wilson Foundation FSPFI EVALUATION OF TAXABLE PROPERTY FINISHED TUESDAY, AND THE ness Section lof the Village. This Week Movement Which Opens Xext ••••••'Vi. V • . QBAND LIST DULY ATTESTED AND TURNED OVER TO THE TOWN Sunday. BLANKS ARE ISSUED BY STATE TAX COMMISSIONER BLODGETT FOR - The "White Way" Committee Clarence L. Parker of Wethersfleld 1 : The local campaign for the Wood- L, ... CLERK.—THE TOTAL INCREASE IS SUBSTANTIALLY THE will hold its second meeting in the in Tliis State Appointed Cliief of THE RETURNS TO BE MADE FOR THE NEW STATE TAX ON UN­ tawn building next Monday even­ the Local Police.—Assumed His row Wilson Foundation will be R>' \ ' SAME AS REPORTED IN THESE COLUMNS LAST ing at 8 o'clock.
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Interim Evaluation of Virginia's 2016-2017 Milestones
    Interim Evaluation of Virginia’s 2016-2017 Milestones Progress June 30, 2017 EPA INTERIM EVALUATION OF VIRGINIA’s 2016-2017 MILESTONES As part of its role in the accountability framework, described in the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (Bay TMDL) for nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing this interim evaluation of Virginia’s progress toward meeting its statewide and sector-specific two-year milestones for the 2016-2017 milestone period. In 2018, EPA will evaluate whether each Bay jurisdiction achieved the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) partnership goal of practices in place by 2017 that would achieve 60 percent of the nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment reductions necessary to achieve applicable water quality standards in the Bay compared to 2009. Load Reduction Review When evaluating 2016-2017 milestone implementation, EPA is comparing progress to expected pollutant reduction targets to assess whether statewide and sector load reductions are on track to have practices in place by 2017 that will achieve 60 percent of necessary reductions compared to 2009. This is important to understand sector progress as jurisdictions develop the Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans (WIP). Loads in this evaluation are simulated using version 5.3.2 of the CBP partnership Watershed Model and wastewater discharge data reported by the Bay jurisdictions. According to the data provided by Virginia for the 2016 progress run, Virginia is on track to achieve its statewide 2017 targets for nitrogen and phosphorus but is off track to meet its statewide targets for sediment. The data also show that, at the sector scale, Virginia is off track to meet its 2017 targets for nitrogen reductions in the Agriculture, Urban/Suburban Stormwater and Septic sectors and is also off track for phosphorus in the Urban/Suburban Stormwater sector, and off track for sediment in the Agriculture and Urban/Suburban Stormwater sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Yeardley's Fort (44Pg65)
    CHAPTER 2 YEARDLEY'S FORT (44PG65) INTRODUCTION In this chapter the fort and administrative center of Flowerdew at 44PG65 are examined in relation to town and fortification planning and the cultural behavior so displayed (Barka 1975, Brain et al. 1976, Carson et al. 1981; Barka 1993; Hodges 1987, 1992a, 1992b, 1993; Deetz 1993). To develop this information, we present the historical data pertaining to town development and documented fortification initiatives as a key part of an overall descriptive grid to exploit the ambiguity of the site phenomena and the historic record. We are not just using historic documents to perform a validation of archaeological hypotheses; rather, we are trying to understand how small-scale variant planning models evolved regionally in a trajectory away from mainstream planning ideals (Beaudry 1988:1). This helps refine our perceptions of this site. The analysis then turns to close examination of design components at the archaeological site that might reveal evidence of competence or "mental template." These are then also factored into a more balanced and meaningful cultural interpretation of the site. 58 59 The site is used to develop baseline explanatory models that are considered in a broader, multi-site context in Chapter 3. Therefore, this section will detail more robust working interpretations that help lay the foundations for the direction of the entire study. In short, learning more about this site as a representative example of an Anglo-Dutch fort/English farmstead teaches us more about many sites struggling with the same practical constraints and planning ideals that Garvan (1951) and Reps (1972) defined.
    [Show full text]
  • York River Water Budget
    W&M ScholarWorks Reports 1-29-2009 York River Water Budget Carl Hershner Virginia Institute of Marine Science Molly Mitchell Virginia Institute of Marine Science Donna Marie Bilkovic Virginia Institute of Marine Science Julie D. Herman Virginia Institute of Marine Science Center for Coastal Resources Management, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports Part of the Fresh Water Studies Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Oceanography Commons Recommended Citation Hershner, C., Mitchell, M., Bilkovic, D. M., Herman, J. D., & Center for Coastal Resources Management, Virginia Institute of Marine Science. (2009) York River Water Budget. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary. https://doi.org/10.21220/V56S39 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. YORK RIVER WATER BUDGET REPORT By the Center for Coastal Resources Management Virginia Institute of Marine Science January 29, 2009 Authors: Carl Hershner Molly Roggero Donna Bilkovic Julie Herman Table of Contents Introduction............................................................................................................................. 3 Methods of determining instream flow requirement ....................................................................... 4 Hydrological methods.....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The First People of Virginia a Social Studies Resource Unit for K-6 Students
    The First People of Virginia A Social Studies Resource Unit for K-6 Students Image: Arrival of Englishmen in Virginia from Thomas Harriot, A Brief and True Report, 1590 Submitted as Partial Requirement for EDUC 405/ CRIN L05 Elementary Social Studies Curriculum and Instruction Professor Gail McEachron Prepared By: Lauren Medina: http://lemedina.wmwikis.net/ Meagan Taylor: http://mltaylor01.wmwikis.net Julia Vans: http://jcvans.wmwikis.net Historical narrative: All group members Lesson One- Map/Globe skills: All group members Lesson Two- Critical Thinking and The Arts: Julia Vans Lesson Three-Civic Engagement: Meagan Taylor Lesson Four-Global Inquiry: Lauren Medina Artifact One: Lauren Medina Artifact Two: Meagan Taylor Artifact Three: Julia Vans Artifact Four: Meagan Taylor Assessments: All group members 2 The First People of Virginia Introduction The history of Native Americans prior to European contact is often ignored in K-6 curriculums, and the narratives transmitted in schools regarding early Native Americans interactions with Europeans are often biased towards a Euro-centric perspective. It is important, however, for students to understand that American History did not begin with European exploration. Rather, European settlement in North America must be contextualized within the framework of the pre-existing Native American civilizations they encountered upon their arrival. Studying Native Americans and their interactions with Europeans and each other prior to 1619 aligns well with National Standards for History as well as Virginia Standards of Learning (SOLs), which dictate that students should gain an understanding of diverse historical origins of the people of Virginia. There are standards in every elementary grade level that are applicable to this topic of study including Virginia SOLs K.1, K.4, 1.7, 1.12, 2.4, 3.3, VS.2d, VS.2e, VS.2f and WHII.4 (see Appendix A).
    [Show full text]
  • RMS Titanic - Wikipedia
    RMS Titanic - Wikipedia http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic RMS Titanic Da Wikipedia, l'enciclopedia libera. « Nemmeno Dio potrebbe fare affondare questa RMS Titanic nave. » (Il marinaio A.Bardetta del Titanic alla signora Caldwell, il 10 aprile 1912.) Il RMS Titanic era una nave passeggeri britannica della Olympic Class , divenuta famosa per la collisione con un iceberg nella notte tra il 14 e il 15 aprile 1912, e il conseguente drammatico affondamento avvenuto nelle prime ore del giorno successivo. Secondo di un trio di transatlantici, il Titanic , con le sue Descrizione generale due navi gemelle Olympic e Britannic , era stato progettato per offrire un collegamento settimanale con l'America, e Tipo Transatlantico garantire il dominio delle rotte oceaniche alla White Star Classe Olympic Line. Costruttori Harland and Wolff Cantiere Belfast, Irlanda del Nord. Costruito presso i cantieri Harland and Wolff di Belfast, il Titanic rappresentava la massima espressione della Impostazione 31 marzo 1909 tecnologia navale, ed era il più grande, veloce e lussuoso Completamento 31 marzo 1912 Entrata in transatlantico del mondo. Durante il suo viaggio inaugurale 10 aprile 1912 (da Southampton a New York, via Cherbourg e servizio Queenstown), entrò in collisione con un iceberg alle 23:40 Proprietario White Star Line, (ora della nave) di domenica 14 aprile 1912. L’impatto Amministratore Delegato: (Joseph Bruce Ismay) provocò l'apertura di alcune falle lungo la fiancata destra Destino finale Naufragato il 15 aprile 1912. del transatlantico, che affondò due ore e 40 minuti più tardi (alle 2:20 del 15 aprile) spezzandosi in due tronconi. Caratteristiche generali Dislocamento 52.310 t Nella sciagura, una delle più grandi tragedie nella storia Stazza lorda 46.328 t della navigazione civile, persero la vita 1517 dei 2227 Lunghezza 269 m passeggeri imbarcati.
    [Show full text]
  • James River by Anadromous Fishes
    USE OF OF LOWER TRIBUTARIES THE JAMES ANADROMOUS RIVER FISHES BY Iq•chae1 Odom C. R¢chard J. Neves John Ney J. Mudr, John I•I. e H•ZdZ•e and Sciences Depar•men• F•sher•es o• University V•,rg•n•a Znst•tute PoZytechn•c and State V•rg•n•a BZacksburg, USE TRIBUTARIES OF THE OF LOWER JAMES RIVER BY ANADROMOUS FISHES Final Report for Analysis Phase of Impediments Two the of an Spawning Migrations to of Virginia Anadromous Fish in Rivers by: Prepared Michael Odom C. Richard J. Neves Ney John J. John Mudre M. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences Virginia Polytechnic University Institute and State Blacksburg, Virginia 2•061 by: Sponsored Virginia Highway Research Council Virginia Highways Department Transportation of and August, 1986 ABSTRACT The tributaries of (downstream lower of the River James use Virginia) Richmond, by striped of bass, shad, American alewife, herring blueback and by reviewing determined was literature, consulting knowledgeable personnel, and agency interviewing local fishermen landowners. and Barriers to upstream tributary, identified for each movement and were highway all crossings impact evaluated their for were on spawning migrations. Striped and bass American shad spawn primarily spawning in the River but James proper, some apparently Chickahominy species in the River. Both occurs only River, ascend Appomattox the but American shad are known preference it. in of their to Because to spawn spawn large tributaries, usually in bridged, highway which are crossings impede do striped either bass not to appear or drainage. American shad in the River James (collectively herring Alewife blueback and known as herring) river ascend and in tributaries that most spawn empty into the River upstream (the James River of Mile 40 Virginia), Scotland, provided of they town have free access adequate depth.
    [Show full text]
  • Reports Which Would Describe the Condi- Routes 30 and 360 in the Upper Portion of the County
    King William County Shoreline Situation Report Supported by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program, and the Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program at the Depart- ment of Environmental Quality through Grant # NA770Z0204 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Manage- ment, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. Prepared By (in alphabetical order): Marcia Berman Harry Berquist Sharon Dewing Julie Glover Carl Hershner Tamia Rudnicky Dan Schatt Kevin Skunda Project Supervisors: Marcia Berman - Director, Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program Carl Hershner - Director, Center for Coastal Resources Management Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 367 of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science January, 2001 Cover Design by Harold Burrell, photo by Dwight Dyke. CHAPTER I - Introduction 1.1 Background systems within the county, and the drainage areas of both extend well beyond 1.4 Report Organization the county limits. A number of small creeks and tributaries feed the larger rivers. This report is divided into several sections. Chapter 2 describes meth- In the 1970s, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) received a King William is rural in character, with more than two-thirds of its land ods used to develop this inventory, along with conditions and attributes consid- grant through the National Science Foundation’s Research Applied to National area covered with forest vegetation. Development is most prevalent along ered in the survey. Chapter 3 identifies potential applications for the data, with Needs Program to develop a series of reports which would describe the condi- routes 30 and 360 in the upper portion of the county.
    [Show full text]
  • Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail Connecting
    CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH CHESAPEAKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL CONNECTING TRAILS EVALUATION STUDY 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 405 Annapolis, MD 21403 CONTENTS Acknowledgments 2 Executive Summary 3 Statement of Study Findings 5 Introduction 9 Research Team Reports 10 Anacostia River 11 Chester River 15 Choptank River 19 Susquehanna River 23 Upper James River 27 Upper Nanticoke River 30 Appendix: Research Teams’ Executive Summaries and Bibliographies 34 Anacostia River 34 Chester River 37 Choptank River 40 Susquehanna River 44 Upper James River 54 Upper Nanticoke River 56 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are truly thankful to the research and project team, led by John S. Salmon, for the months of dedicated research, mapping, and analysis that led to the production of this important study. In all, more than 35 pro- fessionals, including professors and students representing six universities, American Indian representatives, consultants, public agency representatives, and community leaders contributed to this report. Each person brought an extraordinary depth of knowledge, keen insight and a personal devotion to the project. We are especially grateful for the generous financial support that we received from the following private foundations, organizations and corporate partners: The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, The Clay- ton Fund, Inc., Colcom Foundation, The Conservation Fund, Lockheed Martin, the Richard King Mellon Foundation, The Merrill Foundation, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, the Rauch Foundation, The Peter Jay Sharp Foundation, Verizon, Virginia Environmental Endowment and the Wallace Genetic Foundation. Without their support this project would simply not have been possible. Finally, we would like to extend a special thank you to the board of directors of the Chesapeake Conser- vancy, and to John Maounis, Superintendent of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Office, for their leadership and unwavering commitment to the Captain John Smith Chesapeake Trail.
    [Show full text]