Assessment of Potential Conservation LandA Historical and Biological Assessment
of Potential Conservation Land
on the
Connecticut River
Presented To
Dr. John Burk
Smith College Department of Biology
and
Mr. Wayne Fiden
Planning Board, City of Northampton, Mass.
Danielle DiMauro
May, 1992
The Planning Board of the City of Northampton and the
Massachusetts Departments of Environmental Management, Food and
Agriculture, and Fish and Wildlife are currently in the process
of establishing a number of conservation lands in the Connecticut
Valley. Several tracts of land have already been acquired, and
others are in various stages of negotiation, funding, and
purchase (See Appendix 1). One property currently owned by the
Boston and Maine Corporation is among those sought for purchase
by the City. I have interviewed several people in an effort to
collect information about any historical or environmental
significance which this land parcel might have. My purpose has
been to aid the Northampton Conservation Commission in preparing
to petition the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the funding to
purchase this tract as protected land.
This property is situated on the west bank of the
Connecticut River in Northampton, and lies at the tip of the so-
called "Honey Pot" or "Great Bend" (see Appendix 1). The river
does, in fact, bend dramatically at this point, moving from a
course due south to due west, then turning and heading southeast
before returning again to its southerly course. The land under
consideration is flanked entirely on the west and southwest by
railroad tracks, and has the river for its entire eastern
boundary. The southern border is formed by a stream, the Pine
Hill Brook (see Appendix 3), and the northern limit is also
formed by a stream, although a certain amount of ambiguity
surrounds exactly which stream that might be (see Appendix 4, and
Deeds and Map -Books cited below). Maps documenting the sale of
this land to the railroad describe at least the Pine -Hill Brook,
another stream in the middle of the property (marking the
northern limit of the southern half), and a third stream forming
the extreme northern boundary. However, drainage patterns appear
to have been dramatically altered by the construction of
Interstate 91, and the distinctions between the aforementioned
brooks and another to the north (possibly even the boundary)
called Half -Way Brook (see Appendix 3) need to be made clearer
through an up -to -date geological survey of recent changes in the
riverbank and the area between the river and the InterState.
To the north of the railroad property is a stretch of land
recently acquired for protection by the State Department of
Environmental Management (D.E.M.) (see Appendix 1). On the
southeast side of Pine -Hill Brook is the property of the Lane
Construction Company, and further to the southeast lies other
land belonging to the State D.E.M. and including Elwell State
Park (see Appendix 1). In this paper I will be frequently
referring to this particular State property and to the land
belonging to Lane Construction.
I initially spoke with Mr. Wayne Fiden, Head of the Planning
Board and Chair of the Conservation Commission, who informed me
of the interest in the railroad company's land and described the
type of research which would be useful for the Conservation
Commission's purposes. He explained that the Commission needed
to collect any information about endangered species, rare natural
habitat, historical or archaeological significance, and
educational or interpretive potential attached to the tract of
land in question. Such information would strengthen the City's
petition for State funding for this purchase. Mr. Fiden brought
me to the land and showed me where the boundary between the lot
in question and the property of Lane Construction lay (see
Appendix 4). He also explained the system of records which
documents the acquisition of lands by railroad companies.
The County Commissioner's Office, located in the Hampshire
County Courthouse, has a map room containing bound and unbound
railroad plans recorded (for the most part) at the time of sale
of lands to railroad companies. The locations of lands belonging
to the Boston and Maine Corporation are recorded in the bound
books. Another Railroad Company, the Connecticut River Railroad,
now belongs to the Boston and Maine Corporation. However, lands
originally purchased by the Connecticut River Company are
recorded under that company's name. Thus, the purchase by
railroads of the land now under consideration is recorded in two
parts. Half of the land was purchased by the Connecticut River
Railroad, and half by the Boston and Maine Railroad, but both
pieces now belong to the Boston and Maine Corporation, which has
made them available for sale to the City of Northampton.
Samuel L. Hinckley conveyed the southern portion of this
tract to the Connecticut River Railroad Company on September 16,
1850. This transaction is recorded with the Hampshire County
Registry of Deeds in Book 135, page 184. As explained above, the
County Commissioner's Office documents such sales in bound map
books, and this record may be found in Book 7, Section 2, page 6
of those volumes, with the title block:
LOCATION Pursuant to Chapter 356 of the Acts of 1895 of
LANDS in Northampton Purchased or Acquired by the
Connecticut River Railroad Company for Railroad
Purposes. March 1896.
The parcel is described on the same page as bounded northeasterly
by the land of Mrs. Wells (about 128 ft.), easterly by the
Connecticut River (about 1830 ft.), southeasterly by the "Pine
Hill Brook" (about 280 ft.), and southwesterly, westerly, and
northwesterly by "several lines of the Connecticut River
Railroad."
The northern portion of this land was sold to the Boston and
Maine Railroad by John L. Draper. This deed is dated September
2, 1898, and is recorded with the Hampshire County Registry of
Deeds in Book 514, page 3. The County Commissioner's Office
documents this sale in Book Section 2, page 1 (second of two
pages numbered 1), with the title block:
The Boston and Maine Railroad
Pursuant to chapter 356 of the Acts and Resolves passed
by the General Court of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts in the year 1895 and to any and all other
acts in amendment thereof or hereunto enabling, hereby
files its location of certain Land within the County of
Hampshire purchased or acquired by it for railroad
purposes. Said land lies in the City of Northampton,
in the said county and is described and fully set out
herein. This is the second of a series of books of
locations filed in the said county of Hampshire for the
purposes herein before set out in witness whereof the
said Boston Maine Railroad has caused these presents
to be executed by its Board of Directors this twentieth
day of July, 1899 [directors' signatures].
The location of this parcel is described in the Map Book as:
About 2 miles north of passenger station in
Northampton. Beginning at Connecticut River and land
of Connecticut River Railroad Co., running 42 4 west by
said land of Connecticut River Railroad Co., about 145
ft. to location of Connecticut River Railroad, turning,
running north 'V' east about 38 ft., then in a line
curving to the right with radius of 1874.33 ft., 298.13
ft., then north 43 10' east 94.7 ft., then north 44
32' east 503.67 ft., then north 42"' 30' east, 600 ft.,
then north 52" 30' east, about 197 ft., to other land
of Connecticut River Railroad Co., then south 30"' 30'
east 40 ft., south 4"' 30' west 34 ft., then south 55"''
east about 128 ft. to Connecticut River, then by river
southwest about 1700 ft. to beginning.
My next interview was with Mr. Cecil Clark, a lifelong
resident of Northampton. Mr. Clark is very knowledgeable about
the archaeological history of Northampton, and spent many years
serving on the City's Historical Commission. He was kind enough
to visit the property with me in order to identify any historical
landmarks which might be pertinent to this project. Later, I met
with him a second time in order to clarify some of the points we
had discussed on our visit to the site.
Mr. Clark explained that during the late 17th century, this
land along the Connecticut River was given to the ministers of
the First Church of Northampton so that they could raise cattle.
Native Americans in the area taught these early settlers to burn
and clear the land for pasture. Aside from the collection of
firewood as fuel for both homes and brickyards in later years,
grazing appears to be the only extensive use this land has ever
undergone (see Hinckley and Draper deeds cited above). A single
exception to this generalization is the brickyard of N. Herbert
and Son, which existed to the east of the railroad tracks in the
vicinity of this property (see Appendix 3). However, due to the
ambiguity of the water boundaries, determining whether this
brickyard was inside or outside of the limits of this tract is
quite difficult.
From an archaeological perspective, the land under
consideration retains little significance, because no evidence of
Native American encampments or the presence of early settlers can
be found there. Mr. Clark speculates that the floodplain which
comprises most of this tract may have resulted from the erosion
of higher grounds by movement of the river within the last
century (see Appendix 2). If this is the case, then the lack of
evidence of human use would be logical, as the railroad has cut
off this land for the majority of that time. Furthermore,
floodplains, by definition, are frequently under water. Thus,
even if the floodplain has existed for hundreds of years, humans
are unlikely to have spent much time there. Again, the necessity
for an up -to -date survey of the area is clearly evident.
From the historical perspective, however, this land is
indirectly valuable because it is contiguous with rather
remarkable land to the southeast. A number of factors elucidated
in my interview with Mr. Clark make Lane Construction's land
historically interesting. Perhaps most remarkable is the stream
forming the boundary between Lane's property and land protected
by the State Department of Environmental Management to the south
(see Appendix 2). This stream once served as the canal which ran
through Northampton (with its port of call at the corner of Canal
[now State] and Main Streets) and eventually lead to New Haven,
Connecticut (Metcalf 1942). The construction of this canal was
completed in 1835, but because of frequent mechanical problems
caused by "droughts, washouts, and accidents combined with
competition from the railroad, it only endured for 12 years
(Metcalf 1942). After becoming defunct in 1847, many parts of
the canal were covered over, but here the stream still can be
seen. Several nearby depressions in the ground are the remains
of cellar holes and testify to the number of houses which once
existed in the vicinity of the canal. One of these homes was
located on the edge of a hill and belonged to one P. Gleason, the
caretaker of the canal (Clark, pers. comm., see also Appendix 3).
Closer to the water, a large gully running roughly parallel to
the river is the remainder of the road into the area, and
according to Mr. Clark, may have lead onto land to the northwest
which has since been washed away, leaving only the floodplain.
Another brickyard also occupied part of what is presently
Lane Construction's land, approximately where the company's
buildings are now found (Clark, pers. comm., see also
Appendix 2). During the 1950's, one of the city's dumps lay just
southeast of the Pine -Hill Brook, evidenced by the trash which
still can be found there (see Appendix 2). The flattened area
toward the crest of the hill was probably a road by which trucks
entered the dump. Mr. Clark also explained that the only trolley
ever to run in this area of the city was along what is now Route
5, not alongside the railroad, as some speculation generated by
the flattened area above has suggested. The trolley was defunct
by 1932 (Clark, pers. comm.). Another factory which existed on
land now belonging to Lane Construction manufactured hoes.
"Parson's Farm Equipment" was torn down, however, to make way for
the construction of Interstate 91 (see Appendix 2).
Lane Construction has expressed no interest in selling this
piece of waterfront (Fiden, pers. comm.). Consequently, the area
will become an inholding between State and City lands, should the
current purchase of railroad land be realized (see Appendix 1).
However, if the railroad land were obtained by the City, the
Conservation Commission might have greater leverage for
demonstrating to Lane the historical importance of that company's
property, as well as the geographical significance of its
location. The presence of parkland on both sides might enable
the Conservation Commission to convince Lane to either sell the
land itself or the land -use rights to the City of Northampton,
completing the protected corridor along the Connecticut River.
I also met twice with Mr. Terry Blunt, Manager of the
Connecticut Valley Action- Program of the Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Management. Mr. Blunt was able to suggest
several perspectives for my investigation which might be of
interest to State officials, and he outlined for me the
relationships of the various National, State and local
departments involved in the acquisition of conservation lands.
He also described the different forms of protected lands which
exist.
Three types of protection may be applied to conservation
land. The first involves the government agency's "outright
acquisition" (purchase) of property, which can then be protected
in any way that agency deems appropriate. In a second situation,
the land remains under private ownership, while the agency holds
the land -use rights to the property, on which it places
"conservation restrictions This is the type of arrangement
which, as I suggested above, might provide a possible route for
Table 1: Capacities of Government Agencies to Protect Land***
Agency Outright Acquisition Conserv. Restrict. APR
(National)
U.S .F.W.S* XXX XXX
(State)
D.E M XXX XXX XXX
D.F A XXX
D.F W XXX XXX
(Local)
Conservation
Commission XXX XXX
Recreation
Commission XXX XXX
*U.S.F.W.S. United States Fisheries and Wildlife Service
D.E.M. State Department of Environmental Management
D.F.A. State Department of Food and Agriculture
D.F.W. State Department of Fisheries and Wildlife
"XXX" indicates which restrictions an agency may make.
*After Blunt, pers. comm.
negotiation with the Lane Construction Company. The last form of
protection is an "Agricultural Preservation Restriction" (APR),
which is a type of conservation restriction only affecting
agriculturally productive land and maintaining the land for that
purpose. I have summarized the capacities of these several
agencies to protect land with the above measures in Table 1.
Mr. Blunt gave me access to a comprehensive map indicating
protected lands in the Connecticut Valley and the agencies
controlling those lands. The attached topographical map
(Appendix 1) is based upon this map in the D.E.M. office.
The next step in my investigation was to visit the railroad
property with my advisor, Dr. John Burk of the Smith College
Department of Biology, to evaluate the general composition of the
forest on this tract. Clearing of this land, most notably for
firewood, must have ceased at least 60 years ago, as the land has
clearly proceeded through all stages of succession. The current
flora primarily consists of mature floodplain forest, a rare
habitat in Massachusetts, typified by silver maples, cottonwood,
ostrich ferns, and shagbark hickory (Burk, pers. comm.). At
variable distances "inland" from the riverbank, the landscape
rises steeply (see Appendix 2)). These areas of higher elevation
are sites of transitional upland forest with a great deal of
white birch, oak, and Christmas fern (Burk, pers. comm.). Such
species would not be found in a floodplain forest, and indicate
the normal limits of the river's water level.
On the basis of the information presented in this report, I
recommend that the City of Northampton continue to seek State or
Federal funds for the purchase of the riverfront tract offered
for sale by the Boston and Maine Corporation. Because this land
is predominantly composed of rare floodplain forest, the City
will, through this purchase, be acquiring and assuring the
continued preservation of a unique part of the area's natural
history. Additionally, the argument must be made that this
purchase will aid in protecting an aesthetically beautiful
stretch of land from the encroachment of development and
industry.
If the presently held conservation land is to offer wildlife
a safe haven in the face of extensive riverfront development in
Massachusetts, the Conservation Commission must insure that the
preserve is as attractive to wildlife as possible. Generally
speaking, wildlife is more apt to take advantage of a continuous
stretch of undisturbed land rather than several discontinuous
patches of protected habitat. This tract will form a link over
one -half mile long in a chain of protected land along the
Northampton shore of the Connecticut River, adding considerably
to the size and continuity of this reserve (see Appendix 1).
Lane Construction holds on its property the remnants of some
important pieces of Northampton's cultural history. These
remnants have educational potential, as they serve to illustrate
some of the differences between modern American life and that of
the not -so- distant past. Additionally, this land depicts an
interesting change in the distribution of homes in Northampton
coinciding with changes in the area's transportation arteries and
industrial zones. Lane's riverfront property would surely be a
valuable addition to the City's parkland, and this acquisition
might be facilitated by the purchase of the property made
currently available by the Boston and Maine Corporation.
Another important issue in consideration of the railroad
property is the possibility that several species of endangered
wildflowers exist there. Some suggestion has been made to this
effect (Fiden, pers. comm.), but due to the late arrival of
spring this year, T was unable to perform any sort of floral
assessment of the property. To further strengthen the City's
argument for purchase of this land, a complete biotic survey
(including both floral and faunal community assessment), with
special emphasis on the formation of a plant list, is clearly in
order. The available information illustrates that this property
would surely be a worthwhile acquisition for the Northampton
Conservation Commission. However, a geological survey to
elucidate the present boundaries of the parcel, examine recent
changes in the riverbank, and determine the current dimensions of
the land will be extremely valuable for the Commission, as will a
thorough survey of the area's biotic composition.
I am greatly indebted to the following people for generously
taking time from their busy schedules to assist me in this
project. Their knowledge has been my primary resource and
comprises the majority of the information in this paper.
Mr. Terry Blunt, Manager, Connecticut Valley Action Program
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management
136 Damon Rd.
Northampton, MA 01060
(413) 586 -8706
Dr. John Burk
Department of Biology
Clark Science Center
Smith College
Northampton, MA 01063
(413) 585 -3813
Mr. Cecil Clark
Rockland Heights Rd.
Northampton, MA 01060
(413) 584 -2568
Mr. Wayne Fiden
Planning Department
City Hall
210 Main St.
Northampton, MA 01060
(413) 586 -6950
Sources
Additional References
Beers, F.W., and Co, 1873. "Northampton and Easthampton." Atlas
of Hampshire County, Massachusetts. p.62.
Metcalf, 1942. Northampton and the Northampton Institution for
Savings. Northampton, MA: Metcalf Printing and Publishing
Co., Inc.
Topographic Maps (Appendices 1 and 2), published by
U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA 22092.
Z.