Printer Friendly

A comparison of scientific and literary perceptions of pre-European settlement forests in Michigan.

ABSTRACT

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Americans viewed pre-European settlement forests as untouched preserves of large trees and abundant wildlife. Scientists have been testing this view of pre-European settlement forests for the past 75 years, and the idealized image does not match the historical data. Witness trees and bearing trees from the original land surveys record a dynamic pre-European settlement forest with disturbances creating a mosaic of old-growth, mature stands; juvenile forests; and open grasslands across the landscape. Although today's scientists have changed their perceptions of pre-European settlement forests, most literary descriptions either continue to reflect an idealized view of a dense primeval forest or describe an environment similar to present-day forest conditions. As environmental policy from the early twentieth century has shown, policymakers are often more persuaded by literature and art than by scientific publications. Until there is a closer match between science and literature or until scientists make a concerted effort to communicate to a nonscientific audience, forest policy will continue to be influenced by inaccurate ideals of pre-European settlement forests.

INTRODUCTION

Americans since the late 1700s have been interested in the forests that covered their lands before European settlement. Part of this interest stems from the idealized portrayals of the New World's virgin forests in many nineteenth century American paintings and novels. Artworks from the Hudson River School, such as Thomas Doughty's In Nature's Wonderland, 1835, and Thomas Cole's Schroon Mountain, Adirondacks, 1838, depict a majestic, forested landscape with pristine lakes, picturesque mountains, and no human influences (Sweet 1945; Powell 1990). The themes of these artworks often expressed concern for the future management of the nation's resources (Roque 1987). Literary works from this time period depict a similar view of the idealized forest primeval which is best represented in Cooper's (1840/1980) description of a virgin New York state forest where
 the eye ranged over an ocean of leaves, glorious and rich in the
 varied but lively verdure of a generous vegetation, and shaded by the
 luxuriant tints that belong to the forty-second degree of latitude.
 The elm, with its graceful and weeping top, the rich varieties of the
 maple, most of the noble oaks of the American forest, with the
 broadleafed linden, known in the parlance of the country as the
 basswood, mingled their uppermost branches, forming one broad and
 seemingly interminable carpet of foliage that stretched away toward
 the setting sun, until it bounded the horizon by blending with the
 clouds (11).


In the early twentieth century, many foresters compared these characterizations of pre-European settlement forests to early twentieth century forests and warned the public about the "depletion of our virgin forests" (Pinchot 1910/1967) and the risk of a "timber famine so severe that its blighting effects will be felt in every household in the land" (Forest Service 1920). One of the most active advocates of reforestation was Joseph Rothrock, a former member of the Pennsylvania State Forestry Commission, who in 1915 threatened that "unless we reforest, Pennsylvania's highlands will wash to the oceans" (DeCoster 1995). Active lobbying for forest conservation by concerned foresters led to a public demand for reforestation and conservation regulations (van Hise 1910; Ise 1920/1972; Schamaltz 1972). Many forest policies enacted in the early twentieth century reflected a fear that the nation was irretrievably losing its primeval forests due to resource mismanagement. This concern originated from foresters incorrectly comparing early twentieth century forests with idealized literary and artistic descriptions of pre-European settlement forests.

Many of the conservation regulations from the early twentieth century called for foresters to restore the forests to their pre-European settlement, resource-rich condition. To assess whether forest managers achieved this goal, scientists began to reconstruct the historical landscape "before the destruction of the virgin forest by the hands of white men" (Sears 1925) from witness trees and bearing trees identified in the original land surveys. Two methods of land surveying existed in the United States: metes and bounds surveys and rectangular surveys (McCormac 1999). In general, metes and bounds surveys were conducted in the eastern states and rectangular surveys were used in the central and western states. In the metes and bounds system, witness trees were identified at irregular intervals across the landscape resulting in an unintentional, albeit highly biased, sampling of pre-European settlement forests. Scientists mapped the witness trees identified in the land survey records to recreate maps of the original forest. In 1785, the Continental Congress designated the rectangular survey method as the official survey technique for all public lands. Surveyors using the rectangular survey system recorded the species and diameter of two to four trees at every intersection within a one-square mile grid system. In most surveys, two quarter-section trees (witness trees marked at the half-mile point between grid intersections) were also recorded. The stratification of this survey method reduced sampling location biases associated with the metes and bounds data; however, the risk of individual surveyor bias still existed (surveyors often favored certain species, preferred to mark medium-sized trees, misidentified species, and occasionally were guilty of falsification of data) (Bourdo 1956). The metes and bounds surveys had higher potential for biases and were difficult to work with because of the irregular parcel sizes. Therefore, most of the early reconstructions of the pre-European settlement forests were for lands surveyed with the rectangular method (Sears 1925; Kenoyer 1933; Gordon 1940).

In the mid-twentieth century, scientists began to use witness tree data to address ecological questions, and witness tree data were employed to study historical disturbance regimes, fluctuation of the prairie-forest boundary, changes in vegetation composition resulting from European agricultural practices, flexibility of species range limits, and relationships between species distributions and edaphic conditions (McComb and Loomis 1944; Stearns 1949; Etter 1953; Ward 1956; Crankshaw et al. 1965; Wuenscher and Valiunas 1967). Forest ecologists also began to use the witness tree record as a baseline for what North American forests would have looked like with minimal human impact. However, scientists understood that the witness tree baseline was a "snap shot" of a dynamic system rather than a permanent and static forest condition. Forest ecologists into the early twentieth century continued to use witness tree data to describe pre-European settlement vegetation and to further the understanding of the ecology of pre-European settlement forests (Anderson and Anderson 1975; Canham and Loucks 1984; Marks et al. 1992; Black and Abrams 2001). These data led scientists to a different view of the pre-European settlement forests than that portrayed by nineteenth century authors and artists. Disturbance was an important component of historical forests, and gaps or openings in the forest canopy caused by wind, fire, insects, pathogens, and Native American agriculture were common (Lorimer 1977; Whitney 1986; Seischab and Orwig 1991; Zhang et al. 1999). The early forests were either stands of uneven age with small gaps from single-tree mortality or mosaics of even-aged stands (young, mature, and old) created during large-scale disturbances.

The purpose of this study is to identify whether the descriptions of forests from works of literature continued to hold the romanticized nineteenth century view of these "ancestral trees" (Seeger 1916/1973) or whether authors' descriptions reflect the witness tree research conducted by the scientific community. I selected the state of Michigan as my study area because Michigan was the location of some of the earliest witness tree studies and continues to be an active witness tree research location (Kenoyer 1930; Leahy and Pregitzer 2003). Thus, Michigan's pre-European settlement forest composition and ecology was analyzed and documented. Michigan also has the advantage of two recent annotated bibliographies of literature set in Michigan (Andrews 1992; Beasecker 1998).

Comparing and exploring the different perceptions of nature from the scientific and literary communities is valuable for understanding how these two cultures approach the world. Often the scientific and literary communities are viewed as opposite ends of a spectrum of understanding (Snow 1959). Acknowledging these differences and then discovering "where the discourses converge,... how they do, why they do, whether the convergence is fortuitous" (Levine 1987) can reveal much about these two communities' understanding of the world and their attempts to communicate their knowledge to others.

APPROACH AND METHODS

The Scientific View

For this study, I was interested in locating any published, scientific studies that employed witness or bearing tree data to study pre-European settlement forests in Michigan. Detailed publications and maps describing the structure and composition of pre-European settlement vegetation exist for all of Michigan (Table 1). Most of the earlier studies were conducted on a county basis because the U.S. Public Land Survey data existed at that level (Kenoyer 1930). However, more recent studies have been based on ecological units, such as the Luce Ecological District (Zhang et al. 2000), or federal landholdings, such as the Huron National Forest (Leahy and Pregitzer 2003). A majority of the articles were in technical, regional journals, and many of the articles were based on thesis projects that were later published (e.g., Leahy 1994 and Leahy and Pregitzer 2003; nota bene, theses were only listed in Table 1 if they did not exist in another published form).

The Literary View

To determine the literary perspectives on early settlement Michigan, I located copies of 24 published works of fiction set in Michigan during early European settlement periods (eighteenth and nineteenth centuries). The genre of texts included historical fiction, romance, juvenile, and science fiction/fantasy (Table 2). Textual descriptions of natural surroundings were analyzed to construct the authors' perceptions of the forest during the periods of their novels. Most authors described the forests in sufficient detail to reveal their perceptions of the forests. For example, Searight (1994) describes Copper Harbor in 1846:
 The road had evidently been carved out of complete wilderness. It was
 narrow and winding, and stumps were plentiful. They mounted gradually
 through a dense forest that gave them no view except their immediate
 surroundings. Great trees grew to the road's edge; towering elms,
 gnarled, sturdy oaks, soft and hard maples rose in profusion among the
 inevitable firs and birches. As they progressed they entered an area
 of almost exclusive evergreen where cedar and silver spruce, white and
 yellow pine and tamarack crowded each other recklessly (32).


It is clear that he regarded Michigan's early settlement forests as very dense, relatively undisturbed, and containing very old, large trees. Several authors wrote more ambiguous descriptions of their settings and these works required more interpretation. My interpretations may go beyond the author's original intent, but I tried to avoid "elaborate hypotheses" (Eco 1990). For example, DuBay (1993) describes her characters riding through the forests of Mackinac Island in 1812 where "wildflowers abounded, their fragrances mingling, filling the air with a soft potpourri of delicate beauty" (54). This scene was set in midsummer; thus, it can be concluded that in DuBay's vision of the early-European settlement forests, Mackinac Island was a parklike forest with an open canopy to allow sunlight into the understory. A dense forest would have created a very shaded understory that would have prevented wildflowers from developing during the middle of the growing season. Searight's (1994) description of a dense, thick forest contrasts with DuBay's description of an open, sun-filled forest; the two present contrasting perceptions of historical Michigan as interpreted from literary texts.

Analysis

Once all of the scientific and literary sources were gathered, I was able to compare the scientific descriptions of the early Michigan forests based on the witness tree data with the literary descriptions from the works of fiction. I was able to compare species composition, vegetation structure, frequency of disturbance, and the ecology of the scientific and literary descriptions.

SCIENTIFIC PERCEPTIONS OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT FORESTS

Environmental conditions and Native American land use determined Michigan's pre-European settlement forest composition and structure. All soils and topographic features in Michigan are glacial in origin with a mosaic of lake sediment deposits, moraines, and outwash plains (Barnes and Wagner 1996). Lake sediments dominate the shores of Saginaw Bay and the eastern half of the Upper Peninsula. The presettlement vegetation on these soils were swamp forests dominated by balsam fir (Abies balsamea), black ash (Fraxinus nigra), elm (Ulmus americana), tamarack (Larix laricina), and white cedar (Thuja occidentalis). The remainder of the state is a mixture of sandy outwash plains and moraines. Oak-pine forests covered the xeric sandy soils and sugar maple-beech (Acer saccharum and Fagus grandifolia) forests covered the mesic sites. Most of the Native American settlements were in the swamp forests along the lakeshores and riverbanks where the food sources were more plentiful. The inland Native populations were concentrated in the southern half of the Lower Peninsula because the longer growing season allowed corn to mature (Tanner 1986). Where Native American populations were high, they cleared large patches of land using fire or other methods to create agricultural fields; increased the dominance of plants used as crop species; and had an impact on the wildlife surrounding their settlements (Jones and Kapp 1972).

Most of the early explorers, naturalists, and surveyors criticized the swamp forests of Michigan. One explorer to the Michigan Territory in the early 1800s described the swamp forests as "inhabited by hostile Indians, covered with miasmatic marshes and bogs and infested with mosquitoes--that are enough to make Philosophy go hang herself and Patience swear like a Turk or a Trooper" (Hargreaves and Foehl 1964). The trees in these swamp forests tended to be small in stature and diameter (the average diameter at breast height of trees on Isle Royale in 1847-1848 was 22.8 cm (Janke et al. 1978)). Balsam fir and spruce dominated swamp forests in the northern part of the state and black ash, elm, white cedar, and tamarack dominated the southern swamp forests along rivers and in low-lying areas (Dick 1937; Hushen et al. 1966; Jones and Kapp 1972).

Small jack pine (Pinus banksiana) and scrubby sprout-origin oaks dominated the xeric sandy soils of Michigan. Frequent fire resulted in many young, postfire stands. The original land surveyors noted frequent, large recently burned areas in their survey notes (Beal 1888; Whitney 1987). A German forester traveling through the jack pine plains of Michigan in the late 1800s commented upon a complete dominance of the fire tolerant jack pine and a lack of the fire intolerant white pine (Pinus strobus) on xeric sites (Mayr 1890). These pine-oak barrens were most common on the glacial outwash plains of northern lower Michigan.

The mesic hardwood stands in pre-European settlement Michigan had many large trees; however, disturbance from fire and wind caused an uneven-aged structure in the forest and created frequent prairie openings. An early settler to northern lower Michigan described the area as full of "small shrubbery here and there in small patches ... but most of it was grassy plain" (Blackbird 1974). Brewer et al. (1984) identified 49 distinct prairies within a ten county area in southwestern Michigan. The forests on these mesic sites were a mixture of hardwoods and occasional large-diameter white pine (the average white pine diameter from Baraga County in 1846-1853 was 55.4 cm) (Barrett et al. 1995).

LITERARY PERCEPTIONS OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT FORESTS

Modern authors who set their novels in pre-European settlement or early European settlement Michigan depict their forested settings as idealized primeval forests. The portraits typically included large trees, colorful fall foliage, abundant food, and ubiquitous wildflowers. In many instances, the descriptions seem to reflect the author's familiarity with present-day forests rather than a researched understanding of pre-European settlement forests.

The presence of large trees in the fictional settings was universal, but seldom included quantitative measurements of the size of the trees. Instead the descriptions rely on a myriad of adjectives, i.e., "a large sycamore" (Howe 1988), "towering black walnuts" (Forman 1992), "the enormous trunk [of a pine]" (Seno 1993), "the large spruce tree" (Avery 1993), "a huge maple tree" (Stone 1993), "a gigantic oak" (Hivert-Carthew 1994), "that great white pine yonder" (Perkins 1994), "a massive maple" (Chambers 1995), and "a giant American elm" (Hyde 1995). The references to large trees occurred throughout all forest types in Michigan. The authors implied that the large size of the trees reflected their old age: "Pines many generations old soared straight and tall overhead" (Copeland 1990).

In many of the novels, fall foliage was used as a device to indicate the passage of time. Perhaps using the fall foliage as a symbol led to the relatively lively descriptions of fall colors: "The woods were gorgeous with the myriad hues of autumn leaves splashing their vivid colors against the background of somber, unchanging evergreens" (Searight 1994); "The August air was cooling in anticipation of autumn. The leaves of the maples had already begun their crimson journey into death" (Avery 1993); and "the forest turned to blazes of red, gold, and orange. But all too soon the leaves lost their color, turned brown, withered and fell" (DuBay 1993).

In the literary descriptions, food was abundant throughout eighteenth and nineteenth century Michigan. Apples dropped "like rain, painting the ground crimson" (Forman 1992); "plum trees growing wildly" (Hivert-Carthew 1994); wild blackberries, black raspberries, blueberries, chokecherries, elderberries, raspberries, strawberries, and thimbleberries were abundant (Chappel 1987; Whelan 1993; Searight 1994; Graham 1995; Toombs 1995; Edwards 1999); morels were easily gathered (Howe 1988); and maple syrup flowed every spring (Chappel 1987; Howe 1988; Seno 1993; Perkins 1994).

The literary descriptions of pre-European settlement forests depict wildflowers growing across the entire landscape from domesticated species growing in yards to wildflowers abounding in fields and forests. Mazoue's (1993) description of Beaver Island in 1850 includes a small fishing village with yards full of bluebells, buttercups, clover, daisies, geraniums, hollyhocks, iris, marigolds, phlox, red and yellow roses, snapdragons, sunflowers, tiger lilies, and zinnias. Although most of the references are not species specific--"spring flowers" (Perkins 1994) or "a few wildflowers in bloom" (Chambers 1995)--most of the species mentioned are meadow or old-field varieties such as buttercups (Toombs 1995), cowslips (Toombs 1995), daisies (Zerler 1994), goldenrod (Stone 1993), violets (DuBay 1993), and wild rose (Hyde 1995). The only woodland species mentioned was spring beauty (Hyde 1995).

Occasionally, the idealized literary descriptions of pre-European settlement Michigan changed from beneficent and nurturing to dangerous. In several novels, characters become lost in the woods causing the pleasant environment to become gloomy; "drenched and miserable" (Seno 1993) characters wander in the dark woods where "snakes, treacherous ground underfoot, and wild animals" (Chambers 1995) flourish, and where the "trees all look alike" (Richardson 1999). Wild animals and swarming insects are identified as dangers of early settlement Michigan even when characters are not lost (Panagopoulos 1993; Hivert-Carthew 1994). Another perceived dangerous aspect of early Michigan forests was the risk of fire that caused "trees and grass [to] burst into a patchwork of orange and red and yellow" flames (Martin 1989).

COMPARISONS BETWEEN SCIENTIFIC AND LITERARY REPRESENTATIONS OF MICHIGAN'S PRE-EUROPEAN FORESTS

One difference between scientific and literary perceptions is the species that grow in Michigan's pre-European settlement forests. Hivert-Carthew's (1994) novel is set in the early 1700s in Wayne County. This area was surveyed in 1785 by the General Land Office, and Bruce W. Dick analyzed the witness tree data in 1937. Dick described this section of Wayne County as a swamp forest dominated by black ash, sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), elm, willow, and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). In contrast, the fictional forest described by Hivert-Carthew included birch, white oak (Quercus alba), apple, plum, red spruce (Picea rubens), white pine, sugar maple, and walnut (Juglans nigra)--all species that never occurred in the witness tree data. In fact, red spruce did not occur anywhere within the state of Michigan (Barnes and Wagner 1996). Edward's (1999) novel, set along the Grand River in 1891, described a forest dominated by basswood (Tilia americana), hickory, maple, pine, white cedar, and willow. Edward's species composition has little in common with Dodge's (1987) witness tree study of the same area. The survey data from 1823-1831 described the area as dominated by white oak, beech, and black oak (Quercus velutina) and Dodge (1987) specifically mentions that the "general low frequency of hickory, a typical oak associate, in the presettlement forest is notable." Although several of the species mentioned by Edwards grew in this area during the 1800s, her novel did not describe the typical forest community as represented in the witness tree data.

Several authors identified shrubs and smaller plants that required ecological analysis from sources other than witness trees. Chappel (1987) describes four shrubs (bearberry, cranberry, sumac, and wintergreen), seven forbs (boneset, catnip, cattail, dandelion, Indian tobacco, purslane, and wild strawberry), one nonvascular plant (moss) and various grasses growing in southwestern Michigan in 1830. From this species list, native species (plants that grew in North America before European settlement) and exotic species (plants that did not grow in North American but were imported by European settlers) can be separated. Catnip and dandelion are exotic species originally native to Eurasia and purslane is an exotic species originally native to southern Asia (Gleason and Cronquist 1991), therefore these three species could not have been growing in Michigan in the 1830s. This suggests that Chappel's (1987) perception of Michigan's original vegetation is more influenced by a knowledge of present-day vegetation (where these three species are common) than by the scientific literature.

The quantitative values included in the fictional settings seldom matched the authors' descriptions of the pre-European settlement forests. Copeland (1990) describes the southern Michigan shore of Lake Huron in the late 1800s as covered with dense stands of white pine "many generations old" mixed with beech, maple, and birch. This composition of species describes an old-growth forest with many late-succession species. However, Copeland (1990) identified the white pine as "sixty to eighty feet above the ground." If Copeland's tree height is used in a forestry site index curve, assuming average site fertility, the white pine in this stand would be 65 years old which does not match the description of this forest as old-growth (Carmean et al. 1989). A better estimate of white pine height in an old-growth, pre-European settlement Michigan forest would be 150 feet (Wendel and Smith 1990).

Many fictional works incorporated descriptions of Native American villages. Witness tree and paleoecology research show that Bay County housed a substantial native population and the surrounding vegetation included large agricultural fields and forests with herbaceous understories created from burning to improve hunting (Jones and Kapp 1972). Whelan's (1993) novel, set in Bay County in 1840, included a number of descriptions of vegetation that could have been influenced by Native Americans. Whelan (1993) describes "a sparse wood that was a tangle of tall grass and briers," and children hiding in the understory "among tall ferns in the little copse of trees." In contrast to Whelan (1993), Edwards' novel (1999) does not indicate the impact of Native Americans on the environment. She describes a busy Ottawa village in 1891 that contained "many log cabins," wooden tools, and many "warm fires." Yet, the forest around the village is described as pristine. In Edwards (1999) novel the early European settlers even covet the "precious lumber" surrounding the untouched Ottawa village.

The authors' descriptions of the biological characteristics of species match some of the published scientific data, but conflicts with others. Hivert-Carthew (1994) describes "a collection of apple and plum trees growing wildly where wind and nature had sowed them." Although wind distributes the seeds of many trees, the seeds of apples and plums are too large to be transported by wind and rely instead upon gravity or animal distribution (Barnes and Wagner 1996). Most authors made a concerted effort to research species phenology and their timing of "budding maples" or ripening berries generally matches the scientific knowledge of phenology.

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LITERARY AND SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITIES

Scientists communicate their research through articles in technical journals; in contrast, the authors used texts as their primary research source. The witness tree research in Michigan is available in 29 articles in technical journals, 4 unpublished theses, 1 chapter in a book, and one internet accessible map (Table 1). Howe (1988), Copeland (1990), Hivert-Carthew (1994), and Graham (1995) use the typical research methods of fiction authors. Howe's (1988) bibliography includes six historical texts and one article in the World Book Encyclopedia; Hivert-Carthew (1994) identifies 67 historical texts as sources for her novel; Graham (1995) provides an annotated source list which includes the interviews, poetry, historical works and correspondence he relied upon for his novel; and ironically, Copeland's (1990) romance novel (a genre notorious for fantastical descriptions [Atwood 1994]) included four of the seldom cited (by the fiction writers) histories of logging in Michigan. Most of the authors researched their novels, yet they did not include scientific literature in their research. If it is true that "science matters inevitably to what happens everywhere else, literature included" (Levine 1987, 5), then for some reason, scientists are not successfully communicating their research to writers and artists; they need to recognize that neither novelists nor the general public access the scientific literature. Therefore, to effectively communicate, scientists must use other venues such as books or nontechnical periodicals. To the credit of some scientists, there have been a number of forest history books published and several recent witness tree articles have been published in professional rather than academic journals (Flader 1983; Whitney 1996; Penry 2001; Schulte and Mladenoff 2001). However, the only way novelists will alter their romanticized view of pre-European settlement forests is for scientists to make a concerted effort to communicate their findings to nonscientific audiences.

DISCUSSION

Scientists, in their attempt to understand the world around them, "question ... conventional wisdom" (Sagan 1997). This project explored how scientists questioned the conventional nineteenth century view of Michigan prior to European settlement as a bountiful virgin forest. They sought a reliable source of data that would allow them to answer the question, "What did the early European settlers see?" The data source they selected, witness and bearing trees from the U.S. Public Land Survey records, allowed them to reconstruct the nineteenth century forests of Michigan. With this new data, scientists altered their perceptions of pre-European settlement Michigan. The survey data showed a dynamic forest system with many disturbances creating multi-aged forests across the landscape. If it is true that science is meaningful even to literature (Levine 1987), then the paradigm shift that occurred in the scientific community should have been mirrored in the literary world. However, based on the 24 novels studied for this project there has been little or no shift in the literary community's perception of pre-European settlement Michigan. I do not intend to imply that fictional works, which are by nature creative, must be factual. Yet, it is important to note that the authors' efforts to achieve historical and geographic accuracy (as reflected by the extensive bibliographies and historical maps included in most of the novels) did not achieve scientific accuracy. This lack of accuracy in describing the natural world is notable given that Michigan is a state whose timber and agricultural eras have been portrayed extensively in literature (Andrews 1992). The continued representation of the idealized forest primeval in literature indicates that scientists have done a poor job in communicating their own paradigm shift to the nonscientific world and that the "idea" of a forest primeval is so attractive that scientific evidence contradicting this view is ignored. One of the limits of science is that evidence can not be ignored but must be incorporated into existing theories (Kneller 1997). Literature is allowed the luxury of ignoring the scientific facts to create a more pleasing work of art.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the librarians in the Virginia Tech Interlibrary Loan office for all of their wonderful assistance in tracking down numerous books and articles. This article is dedicated to the late Dr. Constance Coiner who encouraged me to read literature with the eyes of an ecologist.

REFERENCES

ALTER, JUDY. 1994. Libbie. New York: Bantam Books.

ANDERSON, ROGER C., AND M. REBECCA ANDERSON. 1975. The presettlement vegetation of Williamson County, Illinois. Castanea 40:345-363.

ANDREWS, CLARENCE. 1992. Michigan in literature. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.

ATWOOD, MARGARET. 1994. Women's novels. In Murder in the dark: Short fiction and prose poems, 57-62. London: Virago Press.

AVERY, JOAN. 1993. Angel of passage. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

BARNES, BURTON V., AND WARREN H. WAGNER, JR. 1996. Michigan trees. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

BARRETT, LINDA R., JOHAN LIEBENS, DANIEL G. BROWN, RANDALL J. SCHAETZL, PATRICIA ZUWERINK, THOMAS W. CATE, AND DAVIS S. NOLAN. 1995. Relationship between soils and presettlement forests in Baraga County, Michigan. The American Midland Naturalist 134:264-285.

BEAL, W. J. 1888. Observations on the succession of forests in northern Michigan. First report of the Directors of the State Forestry Commission of Michigan for the years 1887-1888. Lansing, MI: Thorp and Godfrey.

BEASECKER, ROBERT. 1998. Michigan in the novel (1816-1996): An annotated bibliography. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.

BLACK, BRYAN A., AND MARC D. ABRAMS. 2001. Analysis of temporal variation and species-site relationships of witness tree data in southeastern Pennsylvania. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 31:419-429.

BLACKBIRD, A.J. 1974. Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. In A Michigan reader: 11,000 B.C. to A. D. 1865, ed. George S. May, and H. J. Brinks, 34. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

BOURDO, ERIC A. JR. 1956. A review of the General Land Office survey and of its use in quantitative studies of former forests. Ecology 37:745-768.

BOURDO, ERIC A. JR. 1983. The forest the settlers saw. In The Great Lakes forest: An environmental and social history, ed. Susan L. Flader, 3-16. Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press.

BREWER, RICHARD. 1984. Species composition and diversity of a mesic prairie relict in Kalamazoo County, Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 23:143-152.

BREWER, LAWRENCE G., THOMAS W. HODLER, AND HENRY A. RAUP. 1984. Presettlement vegetation of southwestern Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 23:153-156.

BROWN, DANIEL G. 1998. Classification and boundary vagueness in mapping presettlement forest types. International Journal of Geographic Information Science 12:105-129.

CARMEAN, WILLARD H., JEROLD T. HAHN, AND RODNEY D. JACOBS. 1992. Site index curves for forest tree species in the eastern United States. USDA Forest Service. North Central Forest Experiment Station General Technical Report NC-128.

CANHAM, CHARLES D., AND ORIE L. LOUCKS. 1984. Catastrophic windthrow in the presettlement forests of Wisconsin. Ecology 65:803-809.

CHAMBERS, PAMELA Q. 1995. Family recipe. New York: Jove Books.

CHAPMAN, KIM A., AND SUSAN R. CRISFIN. 1984. A field search for Newaygo County prairies based on air photos and the soil survey. The Michigan Botanist 23:69-75

CHAPPEL, BERNICE M. 1987. Reap the whirlwind. Fowlerville, MI: Wilderness Adventure Books.

COOPER, JAMES F. 1840/1980. The pathfinder. New York: NAL Penguin Inc.

COPELAND, LORI. 1990. Fool me once. New York: Dell Publishing.

COPENHEAVER, CAROLYN A., AND MARC D. ABRAMS. 2002. Post-European settlement forest changes in Oscoda and Ogemaw Counties, Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 41:147-163.

CRANKSHAW, WILLIAM B., SYED A. QADIR, AND ALTON A. LINDSEY. 1965. Edaphic controls of tree species in presettlement Indiana. Ecology 46:688-697.

DECOSTER, LESTER A. 1995. The legacy of Penn's Woods: A history of the Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry. Harrisburg, PA: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

DICK, W. BRUCE. 1937. A study of the original vegetation of Wayne County, Michigan. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 22:329-334.

DODGE, SHERIDAN L. 1987. Presettlement forest of south-central Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 26:139-152.

DONNELLY, G. T., AND PETER G. MURPHY. 1987. Warren Woods as forest primeval: A comparison of forest composition with presettlement beech-sugar maple forests of Berrien County, Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 26:17-24.

DUBAY, SANDRA. 1993. By love betrayed. New York: Dorchester Publishing Co.

ECO, UMBERTO. 1990. The limits of interpretation. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

EDWARDS, CASSIE. 1999. Savage fires. New York: Dorchester Publishing Co.

ETTER, ALFRED G. 1953. Wildwood: A study in historical ecology. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 40:227-258.

FISHER, JILL H. 1994. Pre-European settlement forests of northern lower Michigan: The role of landform in determining composition across the landscape. Master's thesis, Michigan State University.

FLADER, SUSAN L. 1983. The Great Lakes forest: An environmental and social history. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

FOREST SERVICE. 1920. Report on Senate Resolution 311: Timber depletion, lumber prices, lumber exports, and concentration of timber ownership. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

FORMAN, JAMES D. 1992. Becca's story. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

FREDERICK, DOUGLAS J., LAWRENCE RAKESTRAW, CHRISTOPHER R. EDER, AND ROBERT A. VAN DYKE. 1977. Original forest vegetation of the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore and a comparison with present conditions. The Michigan Academician 9:433-443.

FRELICH, LEE E. 1995. Old forest in the Lake States today and before European settlement. Natural Areas Journal 15:157-167.

GLEASON, HENRY A., AND ARTHUR CRONQUIST. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. New York: The New York Botanical Garden.

GORDON, ROBERT B. 1940. The primeval forest types of southwestern New York. New York State Museum Bulletin 321:1-102.

GRAHAM, LOREN, R. 1995. A face in the rock: The tale of a Grand Island Chippewa. Covelo, CA: Shearwater Books.

HARGREAVES, IRENE M., AND HAROLD M. FOEHL. 1964. The story of logging the white pine in Saginaw Valley. Bay City, MI: Red Keg Press.

HARTESVELDT, R. T. 1951. Forest tree distributions in Jackson County, Michigan according to original land survey records. Master's thesis, University of Michigan.

HIVERT-CARTHEW, ANNICK. 1994. Cadillac and the dawn of Detroit. Davis-burg, MI: Wilderness Adventure Books.

HOWARD, ELLEN. 1996. The log cabin quilt. New York: Holiday House.

HOWE, SHIRLEY S. 1988. Legacy of five wives. Decatur, MI: Heritage Valley Publishing.

HUSHEN, TIMOTHY, W., RONALD O. KAPP, ROBERT D. BOGUE, AND JOHN T. WORTHINGTON. 1966. Presettlement forest patterns in Montcalm County, Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 5:192-211.

HYDE, DAYTON O. 1995. The bells of Lake Superior. Honesdale, PA: Boyds Mills Press.

ISE, JOHN. 1920/1972. The United States forest policy: Use and abuse of American's natural resources. New York: Arno Press.

JANKE, ROBERT A., DENNIS MCKAIG, AND RANDALL RAYMOND. 1978. Comparison of presettlement and modern upland boreal forests on Isle Royale National Park. Forest Science 24:115-121.

JONES, CYNTHIA A., AND RONALD O. KAPP. 1972. Relationship of Bay County Michigan presettlement forest patterns to Indian cultures. The Michigan Academician 5:17-28.

KAPP, RONALD O. 1978. Presettlement forests of the Pine River watershed (central Michigan) based on original land survey records. The Michigan Botanist 17:3-15.

KENOYER, LESLIE A. 1930. Ecological notes on Kalamazoo County, Michigan, based on the original land survey. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 11:211-217.

______. 1933. Forest distribution in southwestern Michigan as interpreted from the original land survey (1826-32). Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 19:107-111.

______. 1940. Plant associations in Barry, Calhoun, and Branch Counties, Michigan as interpreted from the original survey. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 25:75-77.

______. 1942. Forest associations of Ottawa County, Michigan, at the time of the original survey. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 28:47-49.

KNELLER, GEORGE F. 1997. A method of enquiry. In Science and its ways of knowing, ed. John Hatton and Paul B. Plouffe, 11-24. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

LEAHY, MICHAEL J. 1994. A comparison of pre-European settlement and present-day forests in the high plains region of the Huron National Forest, northern lower Michigan. Master's thesis, Michigan State University.

LEAHY, MICHAEL J., AND KURT S. PREGITZER. 2003. A comparison of presettlement and present-day forests in northeastern lower Michigan. The American Midland Naturalist 149:71-89.

LEVINE, GEORGE. 1987. One culture: Science and literature. In One culture: essays in science and literature, ed. George Levine, 3-34. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.

LORIMER, CRAIG G. 1977. The presettlement forest and natural disturbance cycle of northeastern Maine. Ecology 58:139-148.

MANIES, KRISTEN L., AND DAVID J. MLADENOFF. 2000. Testing methods to produce landscape-scale presettlement vegetation maps from U.S. public land survey records. Landscape Ecology 15:741-754.

MARKS, P. L., SANA GARDESCU, AND FRANZ K. SEISCHAB. 1992. Late Eighteenth century vegetation of central and western New York State on the basis of the original land survey records. New York State Museum Bulletin 484:1-53.

MARTIN, C. L. G. 1989. Day of darkness, night of light. Minneapolis, MN: Dillon Press.

MAYR, HEINRICH. 1890. Die Waldungen von Nordamerika ihre Holzarten, deren Anbaufahigkeit und forstlicher Werth fur Europa im Allgemeinen und Deutschland inbesonders. Munchen: Universitats-Buchhandlung.

MAZOUE, JO ANN. 1993. Queen of the island. Davisburg, MI: Wilderness Adventure Books.

MCCOMB, A. L., AND W. E. LOOMIS. 1944. Subclimax prairie. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 71:46-76.

MCCORMAC, J. 1999. Surveying. 4th ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

MERK, J. W. 1951. Tree species distribution on the basis of the original land survey of Washtenaw County, Michigan. Master's thesis, University of Michigan.

MUSTARD, TIMOTHY S. 1983. The vegetation of the Manistee National Forest, Oceana and Mason Counties, Michigan. The Michigan Botanist 22:111-122.

PALIK, BRIAN J. AND KURT S. PREGITZER. 1992. A comparison of presettlement and present-day forests on two bigtooth aspen-dominated landscapes in northern lower Michigan. The American Midland Naturalist 127:327-338.

PANAGOPOULOS, JANIE L. 1993. Journey back to lumberjack camp. Spring Lake, MI: River Road Publications, Inc.

PENRY, JERRY. 2001. Short cut method, part 1: A close-up look at one man's determined effort to explain puzzling inaccuracies in early Nebraska surveys. Professional Surveyor 21:6-10.

PERKINS, STAN. 1994. Arvilla and the tattler tree. Swartz Creek, MI: Broad-blade Press.

PINCHOT, GIFFORD. 1910/1967. The fight for conservation. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

POWELL, EARL A. 1990. Thomas Cole. New York: Harry N. Adams, Inc.

RICHARDSON, ARLETA. 1999. More stories from Grandma's attic. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing.

ROQUE, OSWALDO R. 1987. The exaltation of American landscape painting. In American paradise: The world of the Hudson River School, ed. Mary-Alice Rogers, 21-48. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

SAGAN, CARL. 1997. Can we know the universe? In Science and its ways of knowing, ed. John Hatton and Paul B. Plouffe, 3-7. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

SCHMALTZ, NORMAN J. 1972. Cutover land crusade: The Michigan forest conservation movement, 1899-1931. PhD diss., The University of Michigan.

SCHULTE, LISA A., AND MLADENOFF, DAVID J. 2001. The original U.S. public land survey records: Their use and limitations in reconstructing presettlement vegetation. Journal of Forestry 99:5-10.

SEARIGHT, RICHARD F. 1994. Wild empire. Laurium, MI: Iroquois Press.

SEARS, P. B. 1925. The natural vegetation of Ohio. The Ohio Journal of Science 25:139-149.

SEEGER, ALAN. 1916/1973. An ode to natural beauty. Poems. New York: AMS Press Inc.

SEISCHAB, FRANZ, K., AND ORWIG, DAVID. 1991. Catastrophic disturbances in the presettlement forests of western New York. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 118:117-122.

SENO, WILLIAM J. 1993. Enemies: A saga of the Great Lakes wilderness. Madison, WI: Prairie Oak Press.

SNOW, C. P. 1959. The two cultures and the scientific revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.

STEARNS, FOREST W. 1949. Ninety years change in a northern hardwood forest in Wisconsin. Ecology 30:350-358.

STONE, SALLY. 1993. Silver fire. New York: Zebra Books--Kensington Publishing.

SWEET, FREDRICK A. 1945. The Hudson River School and the early American landscape tradition. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art.

TANNER, HELEN H. 1986. Atlas of Great Lakes Indian history. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

TOOMBS, JANET. 1995. Love's desire. New York: Zebra Books--Kensington Publishing.

VAN DEELEN, TIMOTHY R., KURT S. PREGITZER, AND JONATHAN B. HAUFLER. 1996. A comparison of presettlement and present-day forests in two northern Michigan deer yards. The American Midland Naturalist 135:181-194.

VAN HISE, CHARLES R. 1910. The conservation of natural resources in the United States. New York: The MacMillan Company.

WARD, RICHARD T. 1956. The beech forests of Wisconsin--Changes in forest composition and the nature of the beech border. Ecology 46:407-419.

WENDEL, G. W., AND H. CLAY SMITH. 1990. Eastern white pine. In Silvics of North America, ed. Russell M. Burns and Barbara H. Honkala. USDA Forest Service Agriculture Handbook 654.

WHELAN, GLORIA. 1993. Night of the full moon. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

WHITNEY, GORDON G. 1986. Relation of Michigan's presettlement pine forests to substrate and disturbance history. Ecology 67:1548-1559.

______. 1987. An ecological history of the Great Lakes forest of Michigan. Journal of Ecology 75:667-684.

______. 1996. From coastal wilderness to fruited plain: A history of environmental change in temperate North America from 1500 to the present. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

WUENSCHER, JAMES E. AND ALGIRD J. VALIUNAS. 1967. Presettlement forest composition of the River Hills region of Missouri. American Midland Naturalist 78:487-495.

ZERLER, KATHRYN S. 1994. A slip in time: An historic adventure at the Benton Harbor ship canal. St. Joseph, MI: The Sleeping Cat Press.

ZHANG, QUANFA, KURT S. PREGITZER, AND DAVID D. REED. 1999. Catastrophic disturbance in the presettlement forests of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 29:106-114.

ZHANG, QUANFA, KURT S. PREGITZER, AND DAVID D. REED. 2000. Historical changes in the forests of the Luce District of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The American Midland Naturalist 143:94-110.

CAROLYN A. COPENHEAVER

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
TABLE 1. Scientific works used for this study that reconstructed the
forests of early settlement Michigan from U.S. Public Land Survey
records.

Authors Year Site of publication Study site

Barrett et 1995 Journal -- The American Midland Baraga County
 al. Naturalist
Bourdo 1956 Journal -- Ecology western Upper
 Peninsula
Bourdo 1983 Chapter in text -- The Great Lakes Michigan
 Forest
Brewer 1984 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Kalamazoo County
Brewer et 1984 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist 11 counties in
 al. SW Michigan
Brown 1998 Journal -- Int. J. Geographical Chippewa County
 Information Science
Chapman 1984 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Newaygo County
 and
 Crispin
Comer et 1995 Internet -- www.ncrs.fs.fed.us/gla/ Michigan
 al. histveg/miorveg.htm
Copenheaver 2002 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Oscoda and
 and Ogemaw
 Abrams Counties
Dick 1937 Journal -- Papers of the Mich. Wayne County
 Acad. of Sci., Arts & Letters
Dodge 1987 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist 5 counties in S
 Michigan
Donnelly 1987 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Berrien County
 and
 Murphy
Fisher 1994 Thesis -- Michigan State University northern lower
 Michigan
Fredrick et 1977 Journal -- The Michigan Academician Pictured Rocks
 al. Nat. Lakeshore
Frelich 1995 Journal -- Natural Areas Journal Porcupine &
 Sylvania
 Wildern.
Hartesveldt 1951 Thesis -- University of Michigan Jackson County
Hushen et 1966 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Montcalm County
 al.
Janke et 1978 Journal -- Forest Science Isle Royale
 al. National Park
Jones and 1972 Journal -- The Michigan Academician Bay County
 Kapp
Kapp 1978 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Pine River
 watershed
Kenoyer 1930 Journal -- Papers of the Mich. Kalamazoo County
 Acad. of Sci., Arts & Letters
Kenoyer 1933 Journal -- Papers of the Mich. 6 counties in SW
 Acad. of Sci., Arts & Letters Michigan
Kenoyer 1940 Journal -- Papers of the Mich. Barry, Calhoun,
 Acad. of Sci., Arts & Letters & Branch Co.
Kenoyer 1942 Journal -- Papers of the Mich. Ottawa County
 Acad. of Sci., Arts & Letters
Leahy and 2003 Journal -- The American Midland Huron National
 Pregitzer Naturalist Forest
Owens 2001 Thesis -- Michigan Technological Luce District
 University
Maines and 2000 Journal -- Landscape Ecology Sylvania
 Mladenoff Wilderness
 Area
Merk 1951 Thesis -- University of Michigan Washtenaw County
Palik and 1992 Journal -- The American Midland northern lower
 Pregitzer Naturalist Michigan
Mustard 1983 Journal -- The Michigan Botanist Oceana and Mason
 Counties
van Deelen 1996 Journal -- The American Midland Delta County
 et al. Naturalist
Whitney 1986 Journal -- Ecology Roscommon and
 Crawford Co.
Whitney 1987 Journal -- Journal of Ecology Roscommon and
 Crawford Co.
Zhang et 1999 Journal -- Canadian Journal of Luce District
 al. Forest Research
Zhang et 2000 Journal -- The American Midland Luce District
 al. Naturalist

TABLE 2. Fictional works used for this study that were set during early
and pre-European settlement in Michigan.

Author Pub. date Genre Fictional setting

Alter 1994 Historical fiction Monroe, late 1800s
Avery 1993 Romance Detroit, 1860-1865
Chambers 1995 Christian-romance mid-Michigan, 1883
Chappel 1987 Historical fiction Adrian and Owosso,
 1830-1866
Copeland 1990 Romance near Lake Huron, late
 1800s
DuBay 1993 Romance Mackinac Island,
 1812-1819
Edwards 1999 Romance Grand River, 1891
Forman 1992 Juvenile Jonesville, 1860-1866
Graham 1995 Historical fiction Grand Island, early
 1800s
Hivert-Carthew 1994 Historical fiction Detroit River, 1701-1708
Howard 1996 Juvenile Michigan early
 settlement
Howe 1988 Historical fiction Van Buren County,
 1846-1888
Hyde 1995 Juvenile Shore of Lake Superior,
 1898
Martin 1989 Juvenile Menominee, 1871
Mazoue 1993 Historical fiction Beaver Island, 1850
Panagopoulos 1993 Juvenile northern Michigan, 1897
Perkins 1994 Science fiction Upper Peninsula, early
 1800s
Richardson 1999 Juvenile southern Michigan, 1880
Searight 1994 Historical fiction Copper Harbor, 1846
Seno 1993 Historical fiction Fort Michilimackinac,
 1761-1776
Stone 1993 Romance near Lake St. Clair,
 1812
Toombs 1995 Romance near Houghton, 1861-1865
Whelan 1993 Juvenile Saginaw, 1840
Zerler 1994 Time-travel fantasy Benton Harbor, 1895-1896
COPYRIGHT 2004 Michigan Academy of Science Arts & Letters
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2004 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Copenheaver, Carolyn A.
Publication:Michigan Academician
Geographic Code:1U3MI
Date:Sep 22, 2004
Words:7441
Previous Article:Biologic living and rhetorical pathology: the case of John Harvey Kellogg and Fred Newton Scott.
Next Article:Michigan's common law right to government financial information.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters