Loading...
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.