THE CULTURAL LANDSCAPE 0F RURAL ISABELLA COUNTY: VARLATION IN TIME AND SPACE Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MECHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY F. DeWAYNE KYSER 1968 “HEP... L " l’ K A R I" Mic} :11: 15mm U“; \/C Cffit tV ; ‘ v4-‘ I ,... ~ . LN?"l‘-' .__- inn-r . ’ 0,, h g ' . ta r , '9 | 2"; a T1,“: , if '-" r" W 3 3' 1- 5 :1 '.;« v‘ t ' . '. I u .33; :3. ' a 1: ‘-. l t ' 3 tt i. ’1’ 55;? i M k k .3 u. has 'g A A; g" I ”4“" r“! {I 1“ Fa WK Os“ LC; was This is to certify that the thesis entitled \ THE CULTURAL LANDSCAPE OF RURAL ISABELLA COUNTY: VARIATION IN TIME AND SPACE presented bg F. DeWayne Kyser has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. degree in Geography Jfi Date Jog ' £0 ’ 6f 0-169 amome av HMS & SUNS' BUUK BINDERY INC. " RARY amazes "MIT. llcmu JU‘N 013VZEO£ g 4 OCT éfif‘m‘ofi f; A r ~\ ‘. 5 n " :(ll- .4) ‘7 J G J3. ABSTRACT THE CULTURAL LANDSCAPE OF RURAL ISABELLA COUNTY: VARIATION IN TIME AND SPACE BY F. DeWayne Kyser The study proceeds from the premise that human or cultural geography consists of the investigation of activ- ities whereby man uses the land to provide his needs and that the cultural landscape resulting from these activities is the tangible expression of the reciprocal impact of man and environment. .As such it is the product of two interact- ing variables: man's cultural background and the character cfi'the land. The cultural landscape is therefore infinitely diverse in both its spatial extent and its existence through time. The purpose of the study is to examine the interrela- tionship of landscape, culture, and land. It is hypothe- sized that even in microcosm, a cultural landscape will show Change through time as culture changes, and diversity through Space as the character of the land changes. The study focuses onLCentral Michigan with Isabella County as a sample area. F. DeWayne Kyser Components of the landscape are divided into two categories: (1) Spatially extensive elements which do not involve shelter (agricultural land, nonagricultural land, enmipublic function features), and (2) elements which pro- vide Shelter for some human activity and which are conSpic- INNS features of the landscape though occupying little space (farmsteads,nonfarm houses, public and commercial structures). The landscape of the past, with regard to both time change and Spatial diversity, is reconstructed from general vnuks on the history of the area, unpublished correspondence and dissertations, newspapers, periodical articles, and :huerview. Time change up to the turn of the century is found to be largely a matter of converting wilderness to cfiNilization as settlers of European cultural background replaced the Indian, and as local isolation broke down. Since that point, time change has occurred in reSponse to developing culture. The advance of industrialization, com— mercialization, and exchange to the point where at present, tie individual no longer supplies his needs from the land he occuPiesbut instead has become integrated into a world-wide mansland system has greatly affected the local way of life, and this phenomenon has come to be expressed in landscape. II is also found that a very considerable degree of spatial éfiyersity existed at any given time in the past and that lflfis was largely related to heterogeneity of land. F. DeWayne Kyser Because the present landscape is observable in detail, categorization of its components is carried further. Agricultural and nonagricultural lands are classified accord— ing to intensity of occurrence in an attempt to present their landscape roles as clearly as possible. Farmsteads are subcategorized in order to describe the very consider— able changes in form and function occasioned by recent cul- tural evolution. Nonfarm houses are classified and mapped according to age to Show the pattern of development. Public and commercial structures are treated in a similar manner. Reconstruction and observation support the hypoth- esis. Changes in the cultural landscape through time are found to be considerable, continuing, and directly related either to cultural replacement or to cultural evolution. Spatial diversity of the cultural landscape is established for any1given moment of time and is found in general to be closely related to diversity of the land, a situation which arises as differing lands serve different purposes, and as activities common to diverse lands are accomplished in dif- ferent ways, and meet with differing degrees of success. THE CULTURAL LANDSCAPE OF RURAL ISABELLA COUNTY: VARIATION IN TIME AND SPACE BY F. DeWayne Kyser A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Geography 1968 ii © COpyr ight by F. IHWWAYNElICfliER 1969. To the memory of my daughter, Anne Kay Kyser iii AC KNOWLEDGMEN TS In the preparation of this study, I have benefited greatly from the encouragement, cooperation, and assistance of many people in Isabella County. Prominent among these are John Foster of the Isabella Soil Conservation District, James Beutler of the United States Department of Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation Committee of Isabella County, John Cumming and Alexander Vittands of the Clarke Historical Library at Central Michigan University, and Dr. Maurice McGaugh, Chairman of the Department of Geography of Central Michigan University, along with members of the Department Staff. I wish to eXpress my sincerest appreciation to Dr. Ian Matley, of the Geography Department of Michigan State University for his unfailing and invaluable support in the direction of this thesis. I am also deeply indebted to Dr. In M. Sommers and Dr. Daniel Jacobson, also of the Geography Department of Michigan State University, for counsel and encouragement freely given. To my wife Mabel and my daughter Anne, I am most grateful for love, help, and understanding. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . O O C O O O O C O O O O O O O O I LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. II. III. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . THE LAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terrain and Land Type . . . . . . . . . Flat, Clay and Silt Loam Plains . . . . Flat, Predominately‘Wet Sand Plains . . Undulating Clay and Silt Loam Plains . . Flat to Undulating, Predominately Dry Sand Plains . . . . . . . . . . Hill Lands, Predominately Sands . . . . Hill Lands, Predominately Clay Loams . . Extensive Muck and Peat . . . . . . . . THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT PERIOD . . . . . . . The Prehistoric Aboriginal Occupance . . Absence of the Indian at the Time of Survey and White Settlement . . . Traces and Possible Distribution of the Aboriginal Occupance . . . . . Composition of the DevelOping Landscape Early Settlers . . . . . . . . . . . . Pioneer Character of the Area . . . . The European Approach to EXploitation of the Area . . . . . . Origins of the Early White Settlers . . Alienation of the Land . . . . . . . . . Pioneer Occupance of the Hardwood Forest Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beginning of the Lumbering Era . . . . . The Indian Reservation . . . . . . . . . Progression of Settlement During the Early Development Period . . . . . . . Page ix 12 l3 l4 l6 l7 18 20 20 22 24 26 28 30 33 35 39 41 57 6O 68 Chapter Page The Landscape at the Close of the Early Development Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 The Southeast . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 The Southwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 The Central and Northern Area . . . . . 75 The Sand Hills and Dry Sand Plains of the Central West and Northwest . . 76 The Sand Lake Plain and Silt Lake Plain of the East and Northeast . . . 77 Summary of Early Landscape Development . . . 78 IV. THE PERIOD OF EXPANDING COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Change in Time-Space Relationships of the Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Economic and Spatial EXpansion of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Forestry Operations Other Than Pine Lumbering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 General Character of Agricultural Occupance . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 The Landscape at the End of the Nineteenth Century . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 The Southern Till Plain and Silt Lake Plain . . . . . . . . . . 95 The Central and Northern Till Plain and Northern Silt Lake Plain . . . . . 99 The Cut Over Pine Lands . . . . . . . . 103 Broad Aspects of Spatial Diversity at the Turn of the Century . . . . . . . . . 112 V. THE PERIOD OF MATURING AGRICULTURAL OCCUPANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 The Maturing Agricultural Occupance . . . . 115 Cultural Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 New and Changing Enterprises, Patterns, and Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 The Landscape at the Close of the Period . . 132 The Till Plain and Silt Lake Plain . . . 133 The Sandy Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 The Muck and Peat Lands . . . . . . . . 141 Macroaspects . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 our» ‘1 EV “H L...“ :1 (.31 .‘ Vi 1N BACK OF B. o. “17"., - oi g i Chapter VI. THE RELATIONSHIP OF TWENTIETH CENTURY CULTURAL CHANGE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRESENT LANDSCAPE . . . . . . . . . Trends in Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . Gains in Productivity of Man Power and Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Decreasing Number of Farmers and the Increasing Size of the Farm . . Specialization . . . . . . . . . . . . Commercialization . . . . . . . . . . Fragmentation of Operation . . . . . . Changing Crop Structure . . . . . . . Changing Farmsteads . . . . . . . . . Apparent Trends in Economic Produc— tivity of Agriculture in Isabella County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Government in Agriculture . . . . . . The Changing Structure of the Rural Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Improvement and Extension of Amenities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Changing Structure and Magnitude of the Rural Population . . . . . . . . . . . . VII. COMPONENTS OF THE PRESENT LANDSCAPE: SPATIALLY EXTENSIVE ELEMENTS . . . . . . . Category I,A Elements of the Landscape . . Category I,B and I,C Elements of the Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum Intensity Agricultural Lands . Major Intensity Agricultural Lands . . Intermediate Intensity Agricultural Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minimum Intensity Agricultural Lands . Maximum Intensity Nonagricultural Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intermediate Intensity Nonagricultural Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Minor Intensity Nonagricultural Lands. Minimum Intensity Nonagricultural Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII. COMPONENTS OF THE PRESENT LANDSCAPE: SHELTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii. Page 143 144 145 151 154 156 159 160 162 165 169 171 174 178 180 180 187 195 206 214 216 216 227 227 228 229 Chapter Farmsteads . . . . . . . . . Numerical Changes through Time Present Spatial Distribution . Maintenance . . . . . . . . . Functional Evolution . . . . . Relict Forms . . . . . . . . . Nonfarm Residence . . . . . . . . Early Nonfarm Houses . . . . . Prewar Nonfarm Houses . . . . Postwar Nonfarm Houses . . . . New Nonfarm Houses . . . . . . Rural Nonfarm Housing in 1966 Mobile Homes . . . . . . . . . Public and Commercial Buildings . IX. AREAL DIVERSITY IN 1966 . . . . . . X. APPENDIX The Silt Lake Plain . . . . . . The Till Plain . . . . . . . . . . The Clayey Hills . . . . . . . . . The Muck and Peat Lands . . . . . The Sand Lake Plain . . . . . . . The Dry Sand Plains . . . . . . The Sand Hills . . . . . . . . . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . Change Through Time . . . . . . . Diversity in Space . . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Page 229 229 235 236 239 270 270 273 274 277 279 281 289 290 293 293 295 297 298 298 300 301 304 304 308 312 318 LIST OF TABLES Crop yields in Isabella County, 1919-1964 . . Total value of farm commodity sales in 1919-1964 . . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, Agricultural land as a percentage of total Category I,B and I,C land (all inclusive) . . Nonagricultural land as a percentage of I,B and I,C land (all total Category, inclusive) Agricultural land as a percentage of total Category I,B and I,C land (samples only) . . . Nonagricultural land as a percentage of total Category I,B and I,C land (samples only) . . . Decrease in farmsteads by land type, 1915-1966 . Land type area Farmsteads per land type, 1966 . . . . . . . . Relationship of farmstead categories to land types, 1966 ix Page 149 167 194 194 195 195 233 235 236 245 Figure 11. 12. 13. 14. 15 16 17 18. LIST OF FIGURES Isabella County, major land types . . . Isabella County, early settler arrivals and dates of township organization . . . . . Isabella County, settlement pattern, 1879 Early house type ("T" plan) . . . . Early house type (square plan) . . . . . Early barn type . . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, settlement pattern, 1899 Isabella County, settlement pattern, 1915 House type in vogue by 1920 . . . . . . Barn with basement . . . . . . Barn without basement . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, public drains, 1966 . U.S. 27 eXpressway at Shepherd . . . . . Isabella County, agricultural land, 1966 Isabella County, nonagricultural land, 1966 Maximum intensity agricultural land, silt lake plain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intensive cultivation in cash crop area, silt lake plain . . . . . . . . . . . . Selected areas Of Isabella County, 1938 and 1965 (maximum intensity agricultural land) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 10 29 44 47 47 47 84 116 124 124 124 134 176 189 191 198 198 200 F igure Page 19. Aerial photograph of Sections 13 and 24, Coe Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 20. Aerial photograph of Section 36, Wise Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 21. Aerial photograph of Section 16, Nottawa Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 22. Aerial photograph of Sections 21 and 28, Nottawa Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 23. Aerial photograph of Sections 16 and 21, Lincoln Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 24. Selected areas of Isabella County, 1938 and 1965 (major intensity agricultural land, maximum intensity nonagricultural land) . . . 209 25. Sumac along fence in sand hills area . . . . . 212 265. Boulders along fence in sand hills area . . . 212 27. Pine stump fence in dry sand plains area . . . 212 28. Aerial photograph of Sections 14 and 23, Coldwater Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . 215 29. Selected areas of Isabella County, 1938 and 1965 (maximum intensity nonagricultural land) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 30. Aerial photograph of Sections 1 and 2, Wise Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 131. Aerial photograph of Sections 15 and 16, Chippewa Township, 1965. . . . . . . . . . . . 220 32. Pastured hill side in sand hills area . . . . 222 33. Hill side returning to forest in sand hills area . O . O . . . . O . C . . C . . C . . C O 222 34. Hill side in sand hills area where stumps and boulders were never removed . . . . . . . 222 35. Aerial photograph of Sections 11 and 14, Rolland Township, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 xi Figure 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43» 44» ‘45, 46m «47 ‘48. ‘19 SCL 510 52. 53. Isabella County, gains and losses of farm- steads, 1915-1966 . . . . . . . . . . . . Small, well maintained farmstead (minimum modification) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hill land farmstead (minimum modification) Large, well maintained farmstead (minimum modification) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Farmstead of mediocre size and condition (minimum modification) . . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, distribution of farmstead categories, 1966 (minimum modification) . Extensively modified farmstead (dairy) . . Extensively modified farmstead (first for dairy, then beef) . . . . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, distribution of farmstead categories, 1966 (modified and new) . . . New farmstead (beef) . . . . . . . . . . . New farmstead (dairy) . . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, distribution of farmstead categories, 1966 (modified function and residence use) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Barn of modified function category (readily apparent) . . . . . . . . . . . . Barn of modified function category (not readily apparent) . . . . . . . . . . . . Isabella County, distribution of farmstead categories, 1966 (abandoned) . . . . . . . Recently abandoned farmstead . . . . . . . Long abandoned farmstead . . . . . . . . . Pioneer houses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii Page 231 237 237 242 242 243 248 248 250 253 253 256 257 257 263 267 267 269 Figure 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. y 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. Abandoned farmhouse in Prewar nonfarm house Postwar nonfarm house New nonfarm house Isabella County, (prewar) . . . . Isabella County, (postwar) . . . Isabella County, (new) . . . . . Isabella County, 1966 . . . . . . Isabella County, 1966 . . . . . . Isabella structures, County, 1966 rural rural rural sand hills . . . nonfarm residence nonfarm residence nonfarm residence all rural nonfarm houses, distribution of farmers, xiii Page 269 272 272 272 275 278 280 282 286 291 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Human or cultural geography is the study of the activities whereby man uses the land, directly or indirectly, to provide his needs and wants. In the process of using the land, men changes the surface of the earth through the alter- athmn of natural features and the addition of certain forms Ofllis own, thus producing a man-modified segment of earth's surface called a cultural landscape. From the standpoint of geography, culture includes all of man's behavior which is learned rather than instinc- tive: his physical works, his concepts, his technology, his SOCial.structure. Any portion of the earth's surface which b33115 the imprint of man's activity may be properly called a Cultural landscape in opposition to a segment of earth space, often} called a natural landscape, which does not bear the iflEHSint of man and which is now rare in inhabited parts of the earth. The cultural landscape is the tangible and often Visible evidence of the reciprocal impact of man and environ- ment, an impact which becomes increasingly significant with the multiplication of human numbers and the mechanical mmflification of human strength. The observation and inter- ;uetation of the cultural landscape thus becomes one of the neans by which the interrelationship between man and the earth may be studied. The cultural landscape varies infinitely over the earth for it is the product of the interaction of two ever changing elements: man's cultural background and the char— acter of the land. The total learned experience of a group cfi'people equips them to perceive, at a given instant of time, certain possibilities for the use of a segment of land, and they must choose from these. Another group of people wiU1 a different body of knowledge will perceive different Possibilities for the use of a similar segment of land. Two Quite different cultural landscapes may result, even though the natural landscapes may have been very nearly alike. Cultural landscape variation over the earth is further com- Plflcated, especially on a local basis, by the fact that it Occurs not only with man's differing perception of like lands, but also with each major shift in the character of the ILand itself, because with each such change, man per- ceifines a distinctive roster of use possibilities. Diversity of tflne cultural landscape through space thus becomes great indEed, arising as it does both from the character of the laInland from man's culturally conditioned perception of that character, so that given similar land, the cultural landscape varies with culture and given Similar culture, the landscape varies with land. The cultural landscape also changes through time,and it.does so largely as a result of modification in man's per- ception of possibilities, which may come about either through successive occupation of the land by groups with different cultural backgrounds or through the developing culture of a single occupying group. In the latter case, change may be very slow. However, if certain innovations suddenly alter the list of recognized possibilities, change may be very Cultural landscape change through time may be also Most of rapid. (he to changing character of the land through time. smch change results from man's use of the land. Natural change over much of the surface of the earth has been very 51m» relative to the span of man's occupance. It should be noted that the cultural landscape as the terntis used here denotes more than the visible land— scape, including factors both man—made and natural, such as climate or land survey system, which may not be directly Vistble to an observer. ,Also, it may extend spatially beyond the vision of an observer, encompassing all salient phehtnnena of a designated area of whatever size, and is thus, in‘varying degrees, a generalization derived from examina- tion of many locations. Investigation of landscape is commonly used by cul- PUIa1,geographers to help establish man-land relationships In ancient, remote, or primitive cultures. This approach has been used less often, directly and consciously, in the study of man-land relationships in areas of the modern world. Perhaps one reason for this is that less need is felt to investigate physical evidence of processes that may be observed here and now. Another reason is expressed by Max. Sorre, who says of the application of the concept of "g_e_n_rg de vie," or culture systems, to the study of geography in the modern world: We have tried to demonstrate that if its meaning [gang de vie] is adjusted to fit the general evolution of our societies, then the geographer can apply the concept \vith profit in an explanatory description of the modern tnorld. Genres de vie are dissolving under our eyes. (Others are organizing, expanding and being imposed on then. It is enough to recognize the latter forms, but ssometimes we hesitate. IS this because we are in the Inidst of the current and cannot distinguish its banks? Thhs dissertation attempts to further the notion that study Of'the interrelationship of a cultural landscape, the cul- ture system with which it is associated, and the character 0f the land where it is located is one logical approach to theunderstanding of a segment of the modern western world. The basic working hypothesis of the study is that reconstruction and observation will Show certain notable changes occurring within the cultural landscape through time \ lMax. Sorre, "La notion de genre de vie et sa valeur actualle," Annales de Geographie, LVII (1948), 97-108, 193~204, translated and reprinted in Philip L. Wagner and rVin W. Mikesell (eds. and trans.), Readings in Cultural W (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), PP. 397-415, p. 415. as a result of changing culture, and that at a given moment cf time, there has existed a conspicuous spatial diversity cm’the cultural landscape which is related to the heteroge- rmous character of the land. It is the opinion of the “miter that change in the cultural landscape both through time and through space within even small areas is more apparent and is perhaps more revealing with regard to the relationship of man and land than has been commonly appre- ciated. The study which follows was originally suggested by evident spatial diversity within the present central Michigan rural landscape and by rapid changes now apparently in prog— ress there in which new types of agricultural installations are appearing, old ones are being converted or abandoned, residential use of the land is taking on new character, and PUbljc function features such as highways and public util- ities show strong modification. In a study such as this, a choice must be made Whether to observe a large area in general or a small area in detail. The latter course is taken here, and the portion °f<3ermral Michigan chosen, is Isabella County. A county has tihe Obvious advantage of the availability of certain data, and Isabella County is also a good arbitrary spatial SamPle of Central Michigan. It is centrally located and may be Viewed as physically representative in that it contains some portion of most of the chief landform and soil divisions 0f'the lower Peninsula of Michigan, and as a result has some of all its classes of agricultural land from the best to the poorest. It is crossed by one limited access freeway and touched upon by another, giving excellent access to urban areas to the east and south while being far enough away from these to be well beyond any immediate urban fringe. The area was settled throughout (with one minor exception) by a fairly heterogenous group of Americans and Europeans which has led to the development of a landscape in the main uncom- plicated by enclaves of people with strongly differing cul— tural backgrounds. These factors make Isabella County an interesting area in which to observe the relationship between an evolving culture and the development of a cul- tural landscape. Another and perhaps not the least signif- icaruzreason for its choice is that the writer has personally dbsemved and participated in this landscape evolution over a considerable period. The scope of the study is limited topically as well as Spatially. Only the rural landscape will be considered, and ()f this, mainly those most salient features which com- Prisea its major content, the farmsteads, the agricultural land, the nonagricultural wooded and idle lands, the nonfarm reSidences, and those features having a public service func— tion. It is hoped that the study will be meaningful in that it exposes to close scrutiny a segment of rural land- scape which though small may be fairly typical of many similarly situated areas in the northeastern United States. Landscape study, while not usually an end in itself, is one of the means of investigation of the man-land relationship. By it, certain factors may be objectively studied, such as agricultural or other land use patterns, general spatial organization, density of occupance by certain phenomena, or the types of forms which serve given functions for the occupying cultural group, thereby facilitating the identifi- cation of the activities which characterize the man-land relationship existing at any given location. By it, also, certain essentially subjective opinions are formulated con- cerning factors of the general efficiency of human occupance such as progressiveness, stagnation, or retrogression in land use; constructiveness or destructiveness of operations; orderliness or slovenliness in forms and processes; and impressions are created concerning general aspect of area, may it be pleasant, monotonous, prosperous, poverty stricken, Stimulating, or depressing. Landscape study is an essential part of geography whether the underlying purpose may be plan- ning’ prediction, or satisfaction of academic curiosity. CHAPTER II THE LAND The spatial diversity that is evident in the char- acter of the land plays a double role in the diversity of total landscape apparent in the study area, being directly involved in the natural setting and indirectly in the cul— tural features, man having chosen to make differing use of differing lands. It is also involved in the alteration of landscape through time, man having made varying sequences of land use choices in different types of land, thereby giving rise to different sequences of forms. Therefore, the study includes the ensuing discussion of terrain and of land types, categorized in the manner believed most relevant from the Stal’lcilpoint of man's perception of use possibilities and hence to a consideration of the diversity of the rural land- Scape through space and to the alteration of this landscape thrunty. These symbols, most of which have not appeared on any County Plat since 1899, though shown as unknown, prob- ably represent Indian dwellings. This is assumed not only because they are unlikely to represent farmsteads, but also because in almost all cases the land on which they occur is 100 shown as Indian pr0perty on the Plat on 1879, from which the information used in Figure 3 was drawn, and some is still shown in Indian. ownership on the Plat of 1899 from which Figure 7 was derived. Also, the Indians are known often to have located without regard for existing or possible future road development. That the Plat of 1879 (see Figure 3) does not show these interior symbols probably does not, in the opinion of the writer, indicate that structures did not exist there in 1879, but rather that those who compiled the 1879 Plat did not search the areas where roads were lacking or the wooded interiors of the sections to locate Indian dwellings. Any such habitations were probably much more evident in 1899 that in 1879 because of increased clearing and extension of the road pattern. The apparent profusion of structures in this area in 1899 probably results from overlapping white and Indian occupance, though the occupied Indian cabin must be assumed now for the most part to have become a minority element, because of the previously mentioned drOp in the IIIdian pOpulation. With the exception of some surviving Indian dwell- ings, there is no evidence that at the end of the period, the landscape of the central till plain and western border of the northern silt lake plain differed very markedly in general character from the southeast. However, because of later white occupance, it seems reasonable to expect that a 101 few more pioneer buildings might be in evidence, and that clearing, drainage, and road development might not be quite as far advanced. The northern till plain areas in Vernon, southeast Gilmore, and northwest Wise Townships now appear to have been about as densely settled as the southern till plain (see Figure 7), and to have shown similar development. The percentageof c1earing,however, probably did not equal that of the south. It may also be noted from examination of Figure 7, that the clay loam hill lands of the central north area were now also fairly densely settled, and except for thair more rolling character, probably at this time pre- sented a general aspect similar to that of the till plain, j-naSmuch as it is evident from observation that they were once to a considerable degree cleared for agriculture, th(nigh the forest is now returning in some of the roughest area along the northern border of the County. The eastern portion of the northern segment of the Silt lake plain, in southeast Wise and northeast Denver Town- ships, which was flatter and evidently much wetter than the western part, was the last area of productive agricultural land of the County to be settled, and at the close of the Century, still retained something of a pioneer character. A resident of section thirty—four, Wise Township,l who \ W‘ Interview with Austin Moore, farmer in Section 34, LSe Township, Isabella County, November 1967. 102 remembers the early days of settlement, reports that his family were the first settlers (1891) in that immediate vicinity and that it was ten years before a neighbor's light was visible from their house. Assuming this information to be correct, and noting from Figure 7 that there were numer- ous farmsteads shown in this section by 1899, it must be assumed that much clearing yet remained to be accomplished. The above informant estimates that his immediate area was no more than half cleared by 1905. Settlement was retarded here for at least three quite apparent reasons. One was that Wise Township was a part of the Indian Reservation from which white settlement was excluded from 1855 to 1871. Another was the location in the more remote north where all settlement lagged behind that of the southeast. The third was the wet character of this silt lake plain land. The general Opinion in the County seems to be that this northern segment of the silt lake plain was even wetter than the southern portion in Coe and Chippewa Townships, though no good natural reason for this is apparent to the writer. However, the surveyors regarded the two areas differently. As previously cited, fie 1d notes of the original survey of Coe Township, done in 1832, indicate eastern Coe Township to be "1st rate" land out— Side the swamps. Southwest Chippewa Township which embraces part of the same segment of silt lake plain is also termed 103 "lst rate."l On the other hand, notes on a resurvey of Wise Township done in 1851 calls the eastern portion " level, wet, and poor 2nd and 3rd rate,"2 making no distinction between the Silt and sand lake plain types which exist there. The notation " level, wet, and swampy, 3rd rate," is written across the eastern part Of the Township on the 1851 resurvey plat. If early settlers and speculators examined these “OteS, the judgment of the survey crew could have influenced the late settlement here. In any case, late development Caused this area to remain, at the end of the period, a land Of Pioneer buildings, unimproved roads, and considerable Virg in forest, with some plots of land still unclaimed by Settlers . 3 Thflint Over Pine Lands As previously indicated, most of the cut over pine Land into which settlers moved in large numbers in the last two decades of the nineteenth century, consisted of one of the three sandy land types. The first white men known to have examined the area, the survey crews, recognized the Lnferior quality of these lands for agriculture. A summary \ 1"United States Field Notes," Vol. XLVIII. p- 109- 2"United States Field Notes," Vol. XLVIII, Po 205- 30 3"Plat Book, 1899," pp. 10—11. The 1899 Plat shows heme of the land in this part of the Silt lake plain still Eald by Wells, Stone Company. Mr. Moore reports that his thther bought his land from Wells, Stone Company, and that e price in the 1890's was about ten dollars per acre. 104 cm conditions in Coldwater Township in the northwest, which consists largely of the sand hills land type, states: This type is rolling poor sandy soil with the exception of the swamps and some small tracts of good farming land between the swamps along and near the creek through the center. . . .1 {The following is said of Sherman Township next to the south: . . . is rolling, poor, pine, hemlock timbered with exception of the swamps which might be called worthless except for the cedar timber. CPhe sand lake plain lands in Denver and Chippewa Townships ill the central east were described as "level," "wet," "poor email," and "3rd rate."3 Settlers came to these lands in S$>ite of the disadvantages of soil, Slope, and drainage that en~ oma mm.a o.mm a.mm mmm mh.a m.h 0.0m an am.a a.m~ b.om amm camam aaaa mm. N.~a o.ma ¢m ou.a ~.mo m.mm ah¢ om.a m.m m.m~ aw No. «.ma m.~a «w namam oxma uaam mg on Am ma o¢ on Am ma 0v Um AN ma pv Um nu ma mama puma mommumsumm monoosmnm momwumanmm mommumaumm pmamapoz mommumanmm mace .me mucmpammm pom soauossm pmamacoz 838330: 555: ooma .mwmhu mama ou mmauommumu pmwumaumm mo manmccaumamm .oa manna 246 The silt lake plain on the other hand, though it has a similar concentration index of total farmsteads (1.27 as compared to 1.31) has a much lower concentration of minimum modification farmsteads (.62 as compared to 1.31). This circumstance seems primarily due to a high incidence of cash cropping coupled with today's high degree of commercializa- tion of agriculture, both of which factors presently tend to rule out livestock. Now that the tractor has replaced the horse and the supermarket has replaced the cow, the sow, and the hen in supplying the farm table, most farm.buildings in the silt lake plain, no longer serve their original function. It may be observed from Table 10 that the concentra— tion of minimum modification farmsteads is higher in the sand hills and the highly fragmented land types than in the County as a whole (concentration index over 1.00) and that this is a corollary of the relatively high percentages of total farmsteads within these areas constituted by this category, e.g., 32.2 percent for the sand hills as against 25.1 percent for the till plain and 12.2 percent for the silt lake plain. Most of the farmers who remain in business in these marginal areas do so by virtue of using the old plant with minimal investment in updating. Modified farmsteads.--The 1966 field survey revealed 164 farmsteads (6.0 percent) in the County which have been extensively altered either for the purpose of expansion or Specialization. The most numerous and most obvious of these 247 have been modified for dairy or beef enterprises. Figure 42 is a typical example of the former. The small white masonry structure on the front of the high round roofed barn is a milk house. The concrete stave silo at the end of this barn and the low building attached to the rear, which is a loose housing shelter for cattle, represent the first stage of an extensive modification. The second and larger concrete silo and the second loose housing shelter1 to the rear of the first represents a second stage of the expansion modifica- tion. Somewhere in the complex, probably in the old barn near the milk house, is very likely a milking parlor into which cows from the loose housing areas are admitted in groups of four, six, or eight for milking. The high barn predates World.War I. The main expansion postdates World War II. The investment here will have run into many thou— sands of dollars. Figure 43 is an example of another multistage eXpan- sion. The lean-to shelter at the right end of the old cen- tral barn is a milk house and this plus the relatively small 1This building is called a "pole barn" and is con- structed by placing posts (usually of lodge pole pine) on concrete pads in the earth in such a manner that the posts become both the foundation and the main structural members of the building. The surface is covered with sheet metal. In new construction, these buildings have very largely con- stituted the replacement for the high rise barn, which has been entirely discontinued since the greatly eXpanded use of the silo for storage of hay crops, and the advent of the pick-up bailer and the field chopper, which events have much reduced the need of storage space for dry hay. 248 4” .n. -o-,' i Figure 42. Extensively modified farmstead (dairy). Figure 43. Extensively modified farmstead (first for dairy, then beef). 249 concrete silo rising to the rear of it represent a venture into a Grade A Milk enterprise (production for the retail fluid milk market). At this stage it would have been classed in this study as a minimum modification farmstead. The four larger silos plus the steel buildings at either end of the old central barn came partially with eXpansion of the dairy enterprise and partially with a recent switch from dairy to beef, which left milking and milk handling areas and equipment unused and called for shelter and feed storage for the greater numbers of cattle required by a beef opera- tion, if it is to equal the income producing capacity of a dairy enterprise. (The return per animal of a beef enter— prise is lower than in dairying, but the return per hour can be greater and the time schedule is less demanding.) Farms have been getting larger since settlement began, and some eXpansion of facilities has constantly taken place. However, prior to World War II, this mostly involved building more of the same, i.e., eXpanding the size of an old building or building new ones not radically different from the old, hence these changes were less noticeable than those described above, which often involve the addition of facilities of a type quite different from the old. Visual comparison of Figure 44 with Figure 1 shows a considerable prOportion of the extensively modified farm- steads occurring in the till plain land type, especially in the north central portion of the County. As may be seen 250 ISABELLA COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OF FARMSTEAD CATEGORIES I966 o FARMSTEADS EXTENSIVELY MODIFIED — EXPRESSWAY . REw FARMSTEADS-LARGE ' — PAVED ROAD - new FARMSTEADS-SMALL — GRAVEL ROAD ALL OTHER FARMSTEADS DIRT ROAD .._._ RAILROAD ,\__ WATERCOURSE $9 WATERBODY '-3=|;% "" 1:! CITY or VILLAGE Figure 44. (Circle explained on page 251.) 251 from Table 10, 50.0 percent of the total of this category occurs in the till plain for a concentration factor of 1.79. Still further concentration in the north central till plain area is indicated by the fact that 23.2 percent of the County total of this category is found within a four mile radius of Beal City in Nottawa Township (note circle on Figure 44), an area which constitutes only 8.8 percent of the county resulting in a concentration index here of 2.62. That such a circumstance is to be found here is not too surprising in view of the previously discussed agricultural orientation of the people here and the fact that animal husbandry has been, and still seems to be, the best approach to agriculture in the till plain. The concentration of modified farmsteads in the silt lake plain, though higher than that for the entire County is lower than that in the till plain (see Table 10). This latter situation is also to be expected from the consider- able involvement of silt lake plain farmers with cash crop- ping, the eXpansion and updating of which generally requires mUch less extensive modification of the old farmstead (though the investment in machinery may be great) than the eXpansion and updating for livestock enterprises. Compari- son of Figures 44 and 1 shows the greatest density of those modified farmsteads which occur within the silt lake plain to lie in the western part of the northern segment of this land type, where the till surface was least extensively 252 water modified and which is thus closer in character to the till plain as well as being adjacent to the livestock ori- ented Beal City area. Table 10 shows a low to negligible density of modi- fied farmsteads in all land types other than the silt lake plain and till plain. This circumstance reflects the inadvisability at present of heavy investment in agricultural facilities in lands less favorable to agriculture than these. New farmsteads.--In spite of the fact that turn of the century farmsteads leave much to be desired when viewed within the framework of mid-twentieth century technology, most County farmers have chosen to modify or tolerate the old rather than to replace, largely because of the rising cost of new facilities and the decreasing return on invest- ment. There are, however, twenty-four large operations with farmsteads (other than the residence) that are completely new since World War II, and most postdate the middle fifties. Twelve of these are cattle farms. A beef operation is shown in Figure 45 and a dairy in Figure 46. Cattle enterprises require the largest physical plant, and farmsteads connected with them are conspicuous features of the landscape because of the huge silos, some of which are sixty feet high and twenty feet in diameter. It is the silos which are the striking characteristics of the new cattle farmstead, rather than the big red barn as in the past. There are several other specialized types of new farmsteads. These, which are 253 Figure 45. New farmstead (beef). Figure 46. New farmstead (dairy). ‘ 1-. a. 254 specifically tree, truck, poultry, cash crOp, and fruit, have from one to four representatives each among these large new operations. There are also several new small farmsteads. These are obviously not connected with full time farming. They are mostly the property of individuals with good off the farm income who, having a yen to do a little farming, have purchased a piece of land, constructed some small new facil- ities, and have then proceeded to do a little farming, for a while at least. Most are more by way of avocation than vocation and are landscape evidence of general affluence rather than agricultural productivity. Several riding horse farms appear among these. Otherwise they are mostly cash crOp and cattle operations. Numbers of new farmsteads in general are too small to warrant an attempt to discuss distribution. Mggifiedgfungtion and residence use farmsteads.-- Farmsteads of Category II,A,4 (modified function) and those of Category II,A,S (residence use) are very different in their extreme aspects. An example of the former is the case in which a farmer has diSposed of a dairy herd and now uses the old dairy barn for swine shelter without drastic struc— tural changes. An example of the latter is the case of a farmstead in which the farmhouse is now occupied by a non- farmer who makes no use of the other buildings. 255 On the other hand, the difference between the case of a farmstead in which a former dairy barn is used by an ex-farmer only to store obsolete and unused machinery and which thus has no agricultural function, and that of a farm- stead in which a part time farmer, who actually farms very little, does use some of his stored machinery a few times a year is rather arbitrary. Two separate categories, repre- sented by separate symbols on Figure 47 were used because in most cases a clear cut difference exists between them. How- ever, both because of their merging nature which reduces somewhat the significance of any attempt at statistical differentiation and because of certain attributes which they have in common, they are discussed together. In the first place, neither is what it seems to a stranger driving through the rural area. The big barns and many outbuildings, sometimes well maintained, suggest herds of cattle and swine, and flocks of sheep and chickens being dilligently cared for by the farmer and his family, while closer examination may reveal something quite different. For instance, absence of foot paths to barn doors and, as in Figure 48, a barnyard grown over with weeds and grass is a usual indicator that no cattle are present. In this case, missing windows and doors are also evidence of lack of use for the intended purpose. This barn is being used as a machine shed and is thus an example of modified function. 256 ISABELLA COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OF FARMSTEAD CATEGORIES I966 u FARMSTEADS WITH ONLY RESIDENCE USED _ EXPRESSWAY o FARMSTEAOG MODIFIED IN FUNCTION — PAVED ROAD WITH MINIMAL CHANGE IN FORM __ elm/EL ROAD ALL OTHER FARMSTEADS om. ROAD ~—-.— RAILROAD N WATERCOURSE a) WATERBODY l I | I run. I CITY «VILLAGE F igure 47 257 Figure 48. Barn of modified function category (readily apparent). Figure 49. Barn of modified function category (not readily apparent). 258 Figure 49 appears to be a well maintained minimum modification farmstead with a dairy operation. However, circumstances which do not Show in the picture are that in this case the grass has been cut with a lawn mower, the manure handling equipment is unused, there are no foot paths to the tightly closed barn doors, and no truck tracks by the milk house, hence no dairy herd. However, the Open machine shed door and tractor tracks on the hay loft approach of the barn show that the buildings are in use for storage of equip- ment and products, and that this farmstead thus also falls into the modified function category. Gates across stable doors usually indicate that swine, sheep, or perhaps feeder cattle are now being penned in what formerly was most likely a dairy cow barn. Loose full length hay or straw in a hay loft revealed by open doors or missing boards, indicate no cattle present for several years past, as all hay and straw is now bailed or chOpped. A second common attribute is that farmsteads of either category may result from a common cause, i.e., aban- donment of the farming operation which may or may not entail abandonment of the land. If a farmhouse continues to be occupied while the land is incorporated into another opera- tion, the buildings may be used by the new farmer for stor- age with a modified function farmstead resulting, or the buildings may stand essentially unused, in which case the 259 farmstead now falls into the classification of residence use only. If the land as well as the farming program is aban- doned, with the residence remaining occupied, the buildings most often are then unused, though in some cases they may still be used by neighboring farmers for various purposes, but almost always, not those for which they were designed. On the other hand, part time farming, arising either from.work off the farm or from partial retirement results often in changed function, but never total disuse of the buildings. Cash crOpping, full time or otherwise, also usually results in modified function farmsteads, as some type of animal husbandry operation has nearly always been suspended since the construction of the farmstead, either in the case of the instigation of a new cash crop operation or in the continuance of an old one, as previously noted in the discussion of minimum modification farmsteads. The number of farmsteads in the combination of these two categories is considerable--l,289 of a total of 2,720. This is not surprising in view of the general movement away from full time farming. As mentioned in Chapter VI, a 1966 field check revealed only 597 farmers in the County who did not work off the farm. Ninety-nine of the wives of this group did work off the farm, and many of the farmers them- selves, while not working off the farm, were not really 260 fully employed on it. An additional 3541 farmers were found who did work off the farm, and 77 wives of this group did likewise. With less than 600 farmers without off the farm work, and some of these being semiretired, it is obvious that a high proportion of the more than 2,700 farmsteads in the County, if occupied at all, are occupied by part time farm- ers or nonfarmers, which means that most of these farmsteads will fall into one of the two classes under discussion. Many farmhouses are indeed occupied by nonfarmers. Some are relatives of an elderly owner, while many have discovered that they could buy a farm and use the old farmhouse, which has often been extensively updated, for something like the same investment required to buy a small plot of land and build a new house on it. Abandonment of outbuildings or modification of their use is by no means limited to the old and least extensively modernized farmsteads. Some with a very high investment in remodeling now fall into one of these categories, as 1The 1966 field survey revealed a total of only 951 farmers, while the 1964 census of agriculture reported 1,570. There are two reasons for this discrepancy. One is that many farmers quit between 1964 and 1966. The other is that the field count was based upon the opinion of the individual himself or that of a responsible person familiar with his Operation (usually the township supervisor), and some of those who were classed as farmers according to the census definition, actually derived so little income from agricul- ture that they did not consider themselves to be farmers. 261 Operators give up and seek other employment. This is also true of some new small farmsteads, as owners become dis- enchanted with their limited operations. With regard to the separate existence of these cate- gories, in Figure 47 farmsteads in which only the residence is in use outnumber those in which the function of the farm buildings has been modified by 815 to 573. This would seem to be an indication that farming operations are being entirely discontinued at a somewhat more rapid rate than they are being scaled down or switched to cash cropping. Figure 47 shows these categories well scattered over the County but with fairly obvious concentration in the cen- tral, north central east, and southeast portions. Table 10 shows the concentration of these categories in combination to be greatest in the silt lake plain and till plain land types. Together they constitute just over half of the total farmsteads in the County, so it is not surprising to find them in greatest number in the land types where numbers of all farmsteads are highest, but it may also be noted from Table 10 that they constitute higher percentages of all farmsteads here than elsewhere. Two factors bearing upon this circumstance are: (l) the greater feasibility of cash cropping in these land types, tending to increase the num— bers of modified function farmsteads there, and (2) the rela- tively high percentage of total abandonment in the others, 262 cutting sharply into the numbers of all partially used farm- steads intheSe latter areas. Abandoned residence farmsteads.--Category II,A,6, or farmsteads in which the farm buildings are used but the res— idence is not, is a small (45 noted in the 1966 field survey, see Figure 50) and somewhat ephemeral one. Their existence comes about in several ways. A common one is expansion of the farm holdings. A farmer may use more than one set of farm buildings but seldom more than one residence. Often the spare residence is rented or sold to a nonfarmer, but sometimes the owner chooses neither to take on the reSpon- sibilities of a landlord or to sell a piece of his land. In some cases the spare house is unsuited for occupancy. There are also cases in which a farmer, desiring to replace his aging or inadequate house, finds his best financial move to be to buy another farm equipped with a good house and move to the new location, meanwhile continuing to use the farm buildings at the first location in which he may have considerable investment. Farmhouses are also sometimes temporarily vacated by the death or disability of the occu- pant, though the farming Operation may be continued. In some cases a farmer who quits farming and goes into another line of work finds that he must move away, but nevertheless does not choose to sell or rent the farm residence, at least for a time, even though neighboring farmers may rent the land and use the other buildings. 263 ISABELLA COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OF FARMSTEAD CATEGORIES I966 FARMSTEADS ABANDONED SINCE I938 _ FARMSTEADS ABANDONED BEFORE I936 — FARMSTEADS WITH RESIDENCE ABANDONED — ALL OTHER FARMSTEADS ............... w "m - EXPRESSWAY PAVED ROAD GRAVEL ROAD DIRT ROAD RAILROAD WATERCOURSE WATERBODY CITY or VILLAGE Figure 50 264 Farmsteads often do not remain long in this classi- fication. The farmer who moves to a farm which he has added to his holding may grow tired of his split Operation, and the buildings at the first location may thus fall into dis- use along with the residence. In the less favorable farming areas, the land associated with an unused residence may also come to be abandoned, throwing the farmstead into the totally abandoned class. Unoccupied houses not infrequently burn, and decrepit ones are sometimes torn down. Estates are eventually settled and houses vacated by death of the former resident are occupied again. Absentee owners grow tired of their long distance maintenance problem and sell or rent. Whether the category is increasing or decreasing is problematical. The falling number of farmers tends to in- crease it, but the pressure of a rising nonfarm population tends to decrease it. Abandoned farmsteads.--Category II,A,7, or totally abandoned farmsteads is one of the large categories with 442 noted in 1966 for 16.2 percent of the total. Permanent abandonment occurs very largely as a result of two processes. One is the expansion of the size of the farm as land hold- ings are consolidated, resulting in surplus farmsteads which may then become unused, and the other is the abandonment of agricultural use of the land. Abandoned farmsteads appear in those lands most favorable to agricultural pursuits 265 usually only through eXpansion of farm holdings, but they appear in the less favorable lands for both reasons. Figure 50 shows abandoned farmsteads to be frequently encountered throughout the County, as might be expected with one or both processes active in the entire area. Their occurrence is more obvious in the land types other than the silt lake plain and till plain, though Table 10 reveals that of these, only the sand hills type has a noticeable higher concentration index. Abandoned farmsteads are conspicuous in the others in the relative sense by constituting a high percentage of a low total of farmsteads. The low concentration index (.70) of abandoned farm- steads in the sand lake plain, the land type least favorable to agriculture, is eXplained by both low original density and high disappearance rate. Only 29.9 percent of the num- ber of farmsteads existing there in 1915 was occupied in 1966, and only 15.0 percent of those deserted since 1915 remained as features of the landscape in 1966. By way of comparison, in the sand hills, 49.3 percent of the number of farmsteads existing in 1915 was occupied in 1966, and of those deserted since 1915, 30.6 remained. The very low survival rate of farmsteads both occupied and abandoned in the sand lake plain is related to an early start of signif— icant farmer exodus, and to the fact that many farm build- ings encountered there were originally somewhat less than substantial. 266 Abandoned farmsteads are to be seen today in all stages, from well maintained buildings, as in Figure 51 to long deserted and decrepit examples, such as shown in Fig- ure 52. The farmstead in Figure 51 is at the juncture of till plain and silt lake plain in good agricultural land. Recent consolidation of holdings has resulted in this aban- donment. Probably in most cases the casual Observer would not note that this farmstead and many others like it are now deserted. The long abandoned farmstead in Figure 52 in which a pioneer log house was never replaced, is in one of the larger areas of flat dry sand plains in the western part of the County. This land is not completely abandoned as may be seen by the corn field at left, but much cleared land in the vicinity has not been tilled for some time, and small trees are invading it. This abandonment could have resulted from either early expansion of operation or abandonment of land, probably in this case the former, inasmuch as the land in this general area is still not completely abandoned. However, were the land at this site more valuable, the old buildings would long ago have been removed to make way for tillage. It is nearly always in the unproductive sandy lands that buildings as worthless as these remain. On Figure 50, 61 of the 442 abandoned farmsteads are indicated to have been deserted before 1938, the distinction being based on whether or not they have ever had electric service. It may be noted that the greatest density of those I I I I I I I I I 2 Figure 51. 267 Recently abandoned farmstead. Figure 52. Long abandoned farmstead. 268 abandoned before 1938 are to be found in the sand hills and in the sand lake plain. This is true probably not only for the reason that both processes leading to abandonment were operative here in the early part of the present period, but also because the land involved in many sites was, like that in Figure 52, not valuable enough to induce anyone to remove the old buildings. A number of pioneer houses, like those in Figure 53 remain in these areas. Figure 54 shows a decrepit house in a sand hill site (note sumac in foreground) which, however, has been abandoned since 1938, as witnessed by electrical service wires still attached. Some of the farmsteads in the sand lands which were abandoned when industrial wages rose sharply after World War I, were re— occupied for a while during the depression of the thirties, but were abandoned again after industrial employment rose with the approach of WOrld.War II. Quite possibly had the situation with regard to industrial diSpersion and job com— muting in the thirties been what it is in the sixties, some of these residences would still be occupied. In the field survey, 59 abandoned farmstead sites were noted, mostly through traces of foundations or remains of orchards. They were mostly found in the least fertile of the sandy lands where there has been little motivation to reclaim the old sites. Those noted were only the most readily observable ones. No doubt a determined search would 269 Figure 53. Pioneer houses. Figure 54. Abandoned farmhouse in sand hills. . »—'.' .‘AI - cc {‘2' 270 bring to light several times this number, still unreclaimed for any purpose. Relict Forms Casual observation when driving through the study area shows the landscape still dotted with farmsteads, most of which are dominated by the red barn and the typical white, two part, two story farmhouse, seeming to indicate a situa- tion not drastically different from that which obtained before World War I. Closer examination, however, has re- vealed this typical farmstead to be a relict form‘which has yet to be eliminated or modified beyond recognition, as rural residents turn to activities other than eXploitation of the land, and as the few remaining farmers alter their mode of operation with changing social and commercial struc- ture and technological advancement. Nonfarm Residence An expression of the influence of cultural change upon the structure of the rural landscape in 1966, which is more obvious to the casual observer than the alteration of farmstead form and function is the proliferation of nonfarm houses. In certain areas, these are now man's most evident imprint on the landscape. Nonfarmers in the County live in essentially three types of residences. One, which has already been discussed, is the farmhouse still associated with other farmstead 271 buildings. Another is the mobile home, which as its name implies, is an ephemeral landscape element, ranking in perma- nence of location somewhere between a house and an automobile. The third is the nonfarm house, of which there are two vari- eties. One of these was originally a farmhouse, which has now lost not only its agricultural function, but also the former associated farm buildings. The other is the house originally unassociated with farm buildings, constructed in most cases expressly for occupance by nonfarmers. Nonfarm houses (landscape element Category II,B, see Appendix) are subcategorized according to the approximate time of their appearance as follows:1 lDating was done by a combination of field observa- tion, aerial photograph study, and interview. These methods cannot in many cases, produce the exact date a house was con- structed, but they do serve to place the nonfarm houses of the County in one of the four general categories devised for this study, which are loose enough to admit of slight over- lap, but tight enough to tell the development story. Most houses can be approximately dated by field observation alone, mainly through type of construction and materials used. For example, houses like that shown in Figure 55, with a steep roof and no roof overhang are prewar. A house such as that shown in Figure 56 with a lower degree of roof slope and roof overhang at the eaves but none at the gables will have been constructed since World War II but quite likely before the middle fifties, placing it in the postwar cate- gory. If the house has asbestos shingles for siding or roof— ing material it is almost certainly no newer than the middle fifties. The state of deterioration of an aSphalt roof is also a guide as to whether such a house is more than a decade old. Long low houses like that in Figure 57 with low roof pitch and considerable roof overhang on all sides is unques- tionably new (built since the middle fifties). The type and design of windows, chimneys, siding material, and of certain other components also serve as age guides though it is neces- sary to be on the alert for evidences of remodeling. Aerial 272 Figure 55. (right) Prewar nonfarm house. Figure 56. (left) Postwar nonfarm house. Figure 57. (right) New nonfarm house. “‘ " 7 H 'Iafla" 273 1. Early, prior to the middle twenties. 2. Prewar, prior to end of World War II, but since the middle twenties. 3. Postwar, since the end of World War II up to the middle fifties. 4. New, since the middle fifties. Early Nonfarm Houses The first category, or the oldest class of nonfarm houses, are to a very great extent comprised by the old farm- houses which have lost their agricultural function and asso- ciated farm buildings, though a few of these were originally constructed for nonfarmers of an earlier time, such as rural ministers, rural storekeepers, blacksmiths, carpenters, or others. However, even these early nonfarm residents seem often to have been able to acquire surplus farmhouses. It is only this class of nonfarm house which has anything approaching an even density of occurrence throughout the area. Even so, it appears that a higher percentage of farm- steads has been reduced to nonfarm houses in the unfavorable farming areas than elsewhere. In Coldwater Township, which lies mostly in the sand hills land type, there are in 1966, 15 of these and 125 farmsteads (early nonfarm houses = 12.6 percent of farmsteads), while in Coe Township which is photographs exist for the area for 1938, 1952, 1958, and 1965. These are often helpful in placing questionable houses, such as those unique in style or materials or those which have been remodeled, into the correct categories. 274 comprised almost entirely by till plain and silt lake plain land types, there are 20 of these houses and 237 farmsteads (early nonfarm houses = 8.4 percent of farmsteads). This former farmhouse is the leading type of nonfarm residence in Coldwater Township. It is also conSpicuous in the other three western townships as well as in Gilmore in the north, in all of which, agriculture is unquestionably in decline. Prewar Nonfarm Hoqses Houses built eXpressly for nonfarmers since the middle 1920's show a highly irregular pattern of distribu- tion which has developed as a result of a set of readily discernible though complexly interrelated circumstances. Entering in are such factors as hard surfaced roads, the availability of electrical, telephone, or natural gas ser- vice, the availability of land, attractiveness of site, and place of work. Proximity to hard surfaced roads has been a prime consideration to nonfarmers building in the rural area, most of whom have commuted to work. The greatest concentration of the second category of nonfarm.houses, those built between the middle 1920's and the end of World War II, appears along former U.S. 27 north of Mt. Pleasant and along M. 20 east of Mt. Pleasant, see Figure 58. Not only did the paved highways provide easy access to several employment cen- ters, especially Midland and Dow Chemical Company, and elimi- nate the often severe dust problem of gravel roads, but the 275 ISABELLA COUNTY RURAL NONFARM RESIDENCE . LOCATIONS W RLRAL NMFARM HOUSES CMSTRUCTED FROM .TI'E MIWLE I920'S TO WORLD WAR II HOW PLEASANT SHEPHERD KAL CITY WOMAN Edd—H“ WINN BLANCHARD LOOMIS ROSEBUSH argtfmmg EXPRESSWAY PAVED ROAD GRAVEL ROAD DIRT ROAD RAILROAD VATERCWRSE WATERBODY CITY or VILLAGE Figure 58 276 combination of gas, electricity, and telephone has been available to rural residents along these roads (and essen- tially only these) since the early 1930's. A few nonfarm houses also appeared along highway U.S. 10 in Wise Township and M. 20 west of Mt. Pleasant. With the extension of electric service to the remain- der of the rural County in 1938 or shortly thereafter, the entire area became much more attractive to nonfarmers. New nonfarm residences began to appear in more widespread loca- tions, even without telephone service in some cases and with- out gas service in most. It may be noted from Figure 58 that even prior to the postwar building boom, nonfarm houses had started to proliferate not only along but also in proximity to M. 20 east of Mt. Pleasant in the flat sand lake plain of Chippewa Township. This area had and continues to have several attractions. First of course, was the highway, making for ready access either to Mt. Pleasant or Midland. The land, being of little value for agriculture or even forestry was comparatively cheap and readily available. The wooded and semiwooded character of the area also seems to have added to its attractiveness. No doubt at least partially because of the availabil— ity of cheap land, much of the early nonfarm housing con- structed here in the sand lake plain was of low value, the units being often small and of the tar paper and roll 277 roofing variety, seemingly continuing the tradition of low quality unsubstantial building started by the shack and shed type farmsteads. Many houses of substantial quality have eventually appeared here, but there are in 1966 almost none of high value, and the average remains obviously below that of most other rural areas. Nonfarm residence got an early impetus here as oil field workers moved into some of the abandoned farmhouses in the early thirties, and some of the early substandard houses were built by these people who no doubt did not intend to stay long. Postwar Nonfarm Houses Nonfarm residential construction has been of consid- erable volume since World War II and continues to increase at an accelerating rate. However, no very great dissimilar- ity is to be observed between Figure 58 showing prewar houses and Figure 59 showing postwar houses (World War II to middle 1950's). In both periods about the same number of houses appeared and in a similar distribution pattern, mean- ing that after the war, nonfarm houses became further concen- trated along U.S. 27 north of Mt. Pleasant and M. 20 both east and west of Mt. Pleasant, but especially east, and that a few more nonfarm houses became scattered about the rural area. There are, however, at least two differences. One is that with the advent of an asphalt surfacing (blacktopping) program after World War II, there appeared an incipient tendency to concentrate along the new black top roads, and 278 ISABELLA COUNTY RURAL NONFARM RESIDENCE LOCATIONS 0F RURAL NDNEARM HousEs ODNGTRIIcTEo FROM WIRLD WAR II To THE MIDDLE Iseo's MP MOUNT PLEASANT — EXPRESSWAY S SHEPHERD __ “v50 mo D DEAL CITY _ GRAVEL Row VIII WIDMAN I o I I ' MILu ............. DIRT ROAD w WINN _,_,_ RNLMAD BI BLANCHARD M mmse I- LOOWS c::> NATERDODY R ROSEBUSH E] CITY U VILLAGE Figure 59 279 the other is that building along former U.S. 27 south of Mt. Pleasant started to pick up after electric power became available here, with the general extension of service to the rural area. New Nonfarm Houses Comparison of Figure 59 with Figure 60 shows some obvious differences. Not only are there more than twice as many new houses as postwar houses, attesting to the acceler- ation of nonfarm residential development during the last decade, but in addition to further concentration in the old locations, particularly along and near former U.S. 27 and M. 20, it may be seen that notable development exists along other rural roads, especially near Mt. Pleasant. Mostly this building has taken place along black tOp roads, whose mileage increases every year, but this is not always the case in the immediate vicinity of Mt. Pleasant or in the sand lake plain on either side of M. 20 to the east of Mt. Pleasant. Also several agglomerations of nonfarm houses with their own streets (subdivisions) have appeared near the city, so that Mt. Pleasant in 1966 is surrounded by nonfarm houses occurring singly or in groups. The subdivisions now developing as a part of this concentration about Mt. Pleasant are essentially of two types. One consists of medium quality houses built on flat land, where there is direct access to a hard surfaced road. The other consists mainly of high value houses in wooded 280 argigwm§ ISABELLA COUNTY RURAL NON FARM RESIDENCE LOCATIONS OF RURAL WFARM MUSES CONSTRUCTED SINCE .THE MIDDLE IBSO‘S WUNT PLEASANT STEPHERD BEAL CITY WEIDMAN WINN BLANCHARD LOOMIS ROSEBUSH EXPRESSWAY PAVED ROAD GRAVEL ROAD DIRT MAD RAILROAD VATERCOURSE WATERBODY CITY 01 VILLAGE Figure 60 281 areas along the Chippewa and North Branch Chippewa Rivers in the rolling lands west of Mt. Pleasant. Rural Nonfarm Housing in 1966 Nonfarm houses have materialized in the County wher- ever there are farmsteads and the roads and public util- ities which serve them, but there are very great differences in concentration, see Figure 61. For instance, in the north— west quadrant of Chippewa Township in the sand lake plain, nonfarm houses are 87.5 percent of a total of 159 residences, while in the southwest quadrant of Broomfield Township, mostly in till plain, they constitute 10.0 percent of a total of 60, and in the northeast quadrant of Coe Township mostly in silt lake plain, they make up 12.2 percent of a total of 74. Along many miles of County roads are to be found no nonfarm houses at all, while very considerable con- centration exists along others. For example, along the County's easternmost 3 miles of M. 20, there are 53 nonfarm houses, constituting 96.4 percent of total residences, and the old farmsteads are almost lost among the newcomers. A three way, interrelated orientation of the distri- bution of nonfarm houses is now observable in the County. One aspect of this is the previously noted clustering about Mt. Pleasant, which is the only center in the County where considerable employment Opportunity exists. A second is the tendency to concentrate along or near the hard surfaced roads, 282 ISABELLA COUNTY ALL RURAL NONFARM HOUSES I966 ONE HousE MR MOUNT PLEAsANT _ sxmssw‘y — FOUR HOUSES s sREPHERD — PAVED ROAD — EIGHT HOUSES B BEAL CITY __ GRAVEL ROAD 3 SUBDIVISION WITH W- WEIDMAN ............... DIRT ROAD 283:? °:S.E:‘ w m «_a mum A APARTMENTS :' 32$?" ;“ 31:22:32“ r". INDIAN REsERVATION R ROSEBUSH [:3 CITY «VILLAGE l D | I S IILII _ Figure 61 283 especially main routes which give ready access to centers where employment opportunity exists, and where the most amenities are available, with maximum development still to be noted along the two highways where significant nonfarm housing development started. While it is true that in the vicinity of Mt. Pleasant not all concentration occurs on hard surfaced roads, most is no more than a mile from one of these, and elsewhere in the County, though individual houses are encountered on gravel or dirt roads, little in the way of clustering is to be found there, with the exception of two groups of very low value houses in Rolland Township, occupying flat sandy land that is virtually worthless for agriculture. The third aSpect of this three way orientation is the tendency to develop on comparatively cheap, readily available land, situated close to Mt. Pleasant or near a hard surfaced highway in the southeastern quadrant of the County, which not only embraces Mt. Pleasant but is nearest to employment centers outside the area to the south and the east, such as Alma, St. Louis, Lansing, Bay City, Saginaw, and especially Midland. The area east of Mt. Pleasant in the sand lake plain may be seen (compare Figure 61 with Figure l) to possess the County's greatest concentration of nonfarm residences. All of the above mentioned factors obviously are operative here to some extent, with that of cheap land being quite apparent. The southern extremity of 284 concentrated nonfarm settlement coincides quite closely with the boundary between the agricultural silt lake plain and the nonagricultural sand lake plain (see above cited Figures). It may be noted in Coe Township in the southeastern corner of the County which is almost all till plain or silt lake plain and good agricultural land, that there are compara— tively few nonfarm houses, even though the area is advan— tageously situated with reSpect to centers of employment and has thirteen miles of hard surfaced road. This land is either not for sale or not for sale at a price which County residents consider reasonable for a site which may have accessibility but little to offer in the way of scenic attractiveness. Although the bulk of nonfarm houses are in the above noted areas of concentration, there are still many scattered nonfarm houses in the County, attesting to the fact that with the extension of amenities to the rural areas, reason- ably advantageous sites have become widespread. Factors of a personal nature often enter into the selection of these scattered locations, such as proximity to relatives, land donated by relatives, liking for a particular community, dislike of close neighbors, or availability of a certain plot of land at the right price or time. Most of these scattered houses are neat but small and simply constructed. In the case of the few scattered high value houses to be 285 found in the County, scenic attractiveness of site and seclusion are paramount location factors. In general, the construction of nonfarm houses in the western part of the County, while by no means negligible, lags far behind that of the east, consisting mostly of a few units or clusters along M. 20 or the County blacktop roads. Large areas of essentially nonagricultural land here remain almost unutilized for the purpose. So far, instead of building new houses, nonfarmers in the west most often occupy the surplus farmsteads (though numbers of farmsteads are comparatively low, numbers of farmers are lower, see Figures 62 and 50). Here, more fre- quently than for the County in general, entire farms with liveable houses can be bought with a lower investment than would be required by the purchase of a small plot of land and the construction of a new house. Also, nonfarmers some- times occupy farmsteads owned by relatives in return for paying the real estate taxes and maintaining the property. In any case, they use the house while usually ignoring the land. The present comparatively low development of nonfarm housing in the west seems to be related largely to the orig- inal low population density and to the lack of nearby cen- ters of population and employment. Nonfarmers in the west work not only in the eastern and southern centers already mentioned but also in Winn, Edmore, Greenville, Big Rapids 286 0 ISABELLA COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OF FARMERS FARMERS WITHOUT OTHER OCCUPATION FARMERS WORKING OFF THE FARM I O I I l IILII I966 III EIII EXPRESSWAY PAVED ROAD GRAVEL ROAD DIRT ROAD RAILROAD WATERCWRSE WATERBODY CITY or VILLAGE F igure 62 287 and several others. Winn within the County and Edmore near the southwestern corner, while not distant for some western rural residents, have provided significant employment for only a relatively short time. A very small portion of the rural nonfarm housing development of the County is constituted by the present Indian Reservation. Of the original reservation set up in Isabella County by the Treaty of 1855 for selection of free land by individuals of the Saginaw, Swan Creek, and Black River Bands, very little remains in possession of Indians. However, under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, which reversed the federal government's earlier policy of encour- aging the breakup of tribal organization and of holding land in severalty,l a single new Chippewa tribe was formed from the remnants of those officially disbanded as a part of the resettlement scheme of 1855. A block of 450 acres of land was obtained by the United States just east of Mt. Pleasant (see Figure 61) in the edge of the silt lake plain as a reservation to be held in common by all members of the newly constituted tribe. Houses were built by the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs and these along with the previously existing farmhouses form a cluster of two dozen nonfarm houses spaced along the county roads on this land. In 1966, apartment buildings for additional Indian housing were 1Dunbar, p. 43. 288 constructed here. The land is rented out by the tribe to local farmers and the proceeds are divided among members. The tribe now numbers about 300, many of whom live off the Reservation, some few still on lands selected under the Treaty of 1855. There were in Isabella County in 1966, more than 1,400 rural nonfarm houses constructed as such and nearly 300 more which have become nonfarm through loss of their former agricultural function and associated farm buildings. With the development in the mid-twentieth century of such factors as rapid growth of population, expansion of urbaniza- tion, eXpansion and dispersion of industry, proliferation of paved highways and automObiles, extension of amenities for- merly exclusively urban to rural areas, and growth of gen- eral affluence to the point where even young married couples can buy a good automobile and build a new house (or buy a mObile home), areas like rural Isabella County are now per- ceived as residentially desirable, even for people whose economic interests lie elsewhere. Rural residents, espe- cially sons and daughters of farmers who through necessity or choice are no longer associated with agriculture, often build or buy homes within the familiar environment rather than move to an urban area, and even some urbanites now seek rural homes, though the 1966 field survey found very few of these in Isabella County who did not have local relatives. 289 The resulting proliferation of nonfarm houses is a very marked landscape change through time. The fact that not all sections of the County are perceived as equally advantageous for rural residence produces also a notable diversity of landscape through space, as the hard surfaced roads are chosen for ease of movement, nonagricultural lands for availability, certain areas for proximity to employment opportunity, and certain sites and locations for various factors of desirability to the individual. Mobile Homes There were more than 400 mobile homes (Category II,C elements of the landscape, see Appendix) in Isabella County in 1966. They are mostly occupied by nonfarmers and repre- sent a considerable addition of nonfarm dwelling units to the approximately 1,700 nonfarm houses existing in the County. Their distribution pattern is quite similar to that of non- farm houses. No considerable portion of the rural area is without them.but they are to be found in greatest numbers in the east and southeast with concentration near Mt. Pleasant, along the main highways, and in nonagricultural lands. The sand lake plain portion of Chippewa Township had fifty-seven as compared to all of Coe Township, with only nineteen. The Townships in the north and west have about ten each. If past performance is a guide to the future, many of these mObile homes will be replaced by houses. 290 Public and Commercial Buildings By comparison of Figure 8 with Figure 63, it may be seen that there has been, between 1915 and 1966, a very great change in the distribution of public and commercial buildings (Category II,D elements of the landscape, see Appendix). Where in 1915, considerable numbers of these were dispersed throughout the rural area, in 1966, those which are functional are largely along main roads or near centers, eSpecially Mt. Pleasant. Of the public and com— mercial buildings now in use, many are new or nearly so (constructed during the last decade). As indicated in Chapter VI, a great deal of social and commerical reorientation has taken place. The one room rural schools and most of the rural churches have been replaced by larger units whose physical plants are usually associated with central places. The blacksmith shops along with the general machine shOps which replaced them for a while after the horse retired from the rural scene, as well as the country store, and the country gas station have all become obsolete and have largely disappeared. In the case of commercial establishments today, not only are the build- ings new, but so are the businesses, with respect to rural location. Farm implement dealers have moved off main street to find room to park their stock of huge machines, and to make access easier for the farm truck or self-propelled machine. With the recent great drOp in numbers of farmers, 291 ISABELLA COUNTY PUBLIC AND COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES I966 .. -IQIIa II . I__.. I. _.I. II+I.I-. I, at I... O O I a . . . h‘ . 4% I I? .9 ’H.‘ II? . 1 _ I a a Awlll . 1IIAII¢I 4 VIIJ V m _ _ _ a .1IkIIIIITIOI1TII +I.‘ .\ .I VI-.. 1-.- -1_ a! ._ a ,. _ ,.. A i _ .\ _ . .II....ITI r1. PA. . - E. II .04 , \I\? \ u A.‘ w _ . .a .3 a \ . G... lbw :-HI.II_ I I a. .9 .. I .(17/ . . _ .. .. m . .. _ .1 w y _ a 0 'l MIIHfi\I .OIII 4 I A I TI I6 I I o A A I a . s l L. . . II IF Ir I {I PF. 6 0" a, I a... u I J 11., I lb . y \LI. .0. I» .on 1 .. A l V.. )\ ‘N _.U . . J.’ p, I A . _ . _ \ f. \ \\ , 4 II .75 \o I P k 0 :I 1 O a . _ o. .\_$ ,I. IIIYII: TI I; .I III 0 I 26 L . 0 II .0. II IbI.II IT I H)!\ I . _ A . _ I I Al O rfi V II C ' . I r IJL D f .. r / . / 1V I4\ I Id .r . I? I AIV IL... ,. 1 1 a v. 1 f . a a . a b I 0 (CI «I I T . . .N _.,.k\.. _xl tlII IWIIITAIIWI Idl. I II T . EXPRESSMY PNEDROAD MPMGJNTPLEASANT o COMMERCIAL, NEw SHEPHERD 0 COMMERCIAL, OLD GRAVEL ROAD DIRT ROAD RAILMAD BEAL CITY 0 COMMERCIAL, ABANDONED I PUBLIC, NEW Wu WEIDMAN WINN W 0 PUBLIC, OLD NEWSE NEW BLANCHARD LOGAIS BI L 0 PUBLIC, ABANDONED CITY or VILLAGE [:1 ROSE BUSH I IILEI ———.'- 1 _ *. b._.._..__.._.-—- Figure 63 292 however, some implement sales buildings are already aban- doned or converted to other uses. Other establishments include riding stables, archery ranges, beauty shops, veter- inary hospitals, nurseries, motels, radio stations, golf courses, air ports, and gas and oil pipe line control sta- tions. Perhaps a sign of the times is a sight which greets one at night when approaching Mt. Pleasant from the south on Mission Road-—that of the bright lights of a radio station shining through the framework of an adjacent dilapidated barn. These establishments now occupy rural sites for such reasons as need for space, isolation, or noncongested access. They serve in the main other than local rural people and having in many cases only the most tenuous connection with the rural community, have no need to be diSpersed through it as former rural businesses were. CHAPTER IX AREAL DIVERSITY IN 1966 In the systematic discussion of the character and distribution of the major elements of the landscape, under- taken in Chapters VII and VIII, considerable diversity through space was noted. Chapter IX attempts a brief regional summarization of the nature of the resultant land- scape in each major land type as an entity. The Silt Lake Plain Here, elements of the natural landscape, though highly influential in the mode of man's occupance of the area, are now less conspicuous than in other land types. There is no noticeable relief except the few stream valleys, and the original forest cover has now been very largely removed, giving the area a decidedly Open aspect. Rectangu- larity, is a conspicuous feature of the cultural landscape, being expressed in fields, property lines, drainage lines, public utility lines, and a very nearly complete grid type road pattern. The entire area seems almost completely devoted to prosperous agricultural development. There are many 293 4', w...\\’... D‘Lm )- I1 294 farmsteads, and for the most part they are well maintained, even though the style of construction often indicates close to a century of existence, attesting to early settlement. Barns are often comparatively small, and close observation now many times reveals that even the rather minimal live- stock programs for which these were constructed have now :u been abandoned. In the heart of the silt lake plain areas, cash cropping is the rule. Beans are the leading crOp, but 5 there are also considerable acreages of corn and wheat. FL 31'”. ‘ . Crop growth is normally very even and very good. Fences are few, and tillage of the land is carried very close to road beds, buildings, and drainage ditches. The latter, often very deep, are a conSpicuous feature of this landscape, though they are gradually being replaced by high capacity tile drains. Field obstructions such as stumps, stone piles, or individual trees are rare. Despite the ubiquitous presence of improved roads, power lines, and telephone lines, nonfarm houses and mobile homes are relatively few. Building plots are either eXpen— sive or unavailable due to the essentially agricultural orientation of the area. However, even though the incidence of farmer occupance is high, close observation of farmsteads often discloses nonfarm occupance of the residence, or in some cases total abandonment of the farmstead, with the land remaining in agricultural use through eXpansion of operation. 295 The Till Plain Here, on the whole, elements of the natural environ- ment are somewhat more conspicuous than in the silt lake plain. The undulating character of the surface provides noticeable relief, and the greater frequency of wooded areas, such as central wood lots, hedgerows, wooded depressions, and dispersed individual trees impart a closed overall aspect. Occasionally, obstructions such as stumps or stone piles do exist in the fields. The general rectangularity of the lake plain landscape is repeated in the till plain but to a slightly lesser degree, with irregularities of slope and drainage more often disrupting the pattern. The existing design is also less apparent because of greater obstruction of view. As in the silt lake plain, there are many farmsteads. They are sometimes less well maintained, though barns are frequently newer and larger, with the early types having more often been replaced by structures more amenable to twentieth century livestock husbandry, and accompanying silos are more common. Livestock enterprises have been the rule in the till plain, and a high proportion of those farm- steads extensively modified in recent years for large scale livestock enterprises are found here. The land is nearly all fenced, though many fences are now obsolete and decaying as livestock programs are discontinued or cattle are confined to feed lots. In general, tillage is not carried as close to 296 roads, fences, or buildings as in the silt lake plain. Open drains in the form of modified natural water courses are frequently encountered, but the straight Open ditches of the silt lake plain are largely absent, being precluded by slope conditions. The chief crops are alfalfa, corn, and wheat, the large acreage of alfalfa reflecting the livestock orien— ,r— tation of the area. CrOps are normally good, but develop- ment is often less even and less luxuriant than in the silt lake plain. To the casual observer, preoccupation with agricultural pursuits is less apparent here than in the silt lake plain, with the possible exception of the Nottawa Town- ship area. The land is obviously not so completely tilled, and dispersed nonfarm houses or mObile homes are more fre- quently encountered. With the exception again of the Nottawa area, attentive observation of farmsteads reveals greater numbers occupied by nonfarmers, although there are also more farmsteads being used as they were originally intended with relatively little modification. While considerable differences do exist between the silt lake plain and the till plain, they do possess a signif- icant overall similarity in being generally favorable to agriculture, which continues to be an important activity in both. On the other hand, with the possible exception of some parts of the clayey hills, the remaining land types, between which considerable differences likewise exist, 297 possess the common feature of being generally unfavorable to agriculture, which is universally in decline there. The Clayey Hills This land type is limited in extent and very varied in nature, ranging in soil composition from low to high clay content and in slope conditions from moderately rolling to very steep. Characterization of the core area is simple enough, but boundary definition is difficult. The areas of steepest lepes and sandiest soils may be forested (oak- aSpen to beech—maple) or they may be partially wooded or even clear, but mostly they are not tilled. However, some of the steeper slopes with more productive clayey loam soils have been cleared and fairly intensively tilled, giving rise to serious erosion problems. Such slopes are either now in agricultural use by means of such erosion control measures as contouring or keeping steepest slopes mainly in hay crops, or else they are planted to trees, used for permanent pas— ture, or simply abandoned, the latter courses having often been taken after severe gullying has occurred. Areas of lower slope and productive soils are largely tilled and except for their more rolling character and sometimes more severe erosion, may appear much like the adjoining till plain. The fragmented occurrence of this land type makes difficult, valid generalization concerning farmsteads, public 298 services, or nonfarm housing. The density, quality, and use category of farmsteads runs the gamut of the County situa— tion. Scattered nonfarm houses do occur, but there are no areas of concentration. The Muck and Peat Lands F“ The majority of the muck and peat lands, as pre- viously noted, have now reverted to a lowland association forest, apparently quite similar in composition to the . original--minus the white pines. However, some of this land ;, remains clear, or more often partially clear, and is used for permanent pasture, usually weed infested but remaining green all summer. .A very small proportion is tilled. Few farmsteads are present, and several irregularities in the county road pattern result from avoidance of building roads across this land type. In general, there has been rela- tively little human activity here, other than exploitation of the timber. The Sand Lake Plain Probably the most conspicuous feature of the sand lake plain is the considerable extent of oak-aSpen forest (mostly somewhat stunted), or land returning to forest. In fact from an oblique areal View, it appears almost as un- broken forest. Topographically, the sand lake plain is nearly as flat as the silt lake plain with the forest tending 299 to conceal the slight relief which does exist, mostly in the form of stream valleys or relict wind and current forms rising a few feet above the general level. Landscape rectan- gularity, though obviously present is somewhat less apparent than in either the silt lake plain or the till plain. The road grid is less complete, the encroaching woodland is having its effect upon field patterns,and in many areas, the forest greatly obscures the view. With respect to agriculture, the sand lake plain and the silt lake plain are at opposite ends of the scale. Little land is under cultivation in the sand lake plain, and such staple field crops as do exist are generally of infe— rior quality. There is a very low concentration of farm- steads, the majority of which are small and often dilapi- dated, and of which more than 25 percent are abandoned. The sand lake plain and the silt lake plain do have in common the feature of relatively few fences, both having a low cattle population, though for obviously different reasons. This land type does, however, boast the County's greatest concentration of nonfarm dwelling units, with the woods along the county roads close to M.20 being literally full of houses and mObile homes, and subdivisions have developed close to Mt. Pleasant. DiSpersed nonfarm houses are to be found throughout, wherever improved roads and power lines exist. There are few high value houses here, 300 and many, especially the older ones, tend to be of somewhat less than average value. The Dry Sand Plains The dry sand plains land type of the interior and western parts of the County is approximately as extensive as 3‘ the sand lake plain but is much more fragmented in occurrence. The general aspect also differs in that the surface varies from undulating to flat with occasional pits or swales, and there is much less forest, and much more evidence of agricul— tural activity both past and present. Farmsteads are more numerous and consist of higher value buildings than in the case of the sand lake plain, though both numbers and quality suffer by comparison with the situation in the heavier lands. Abandoned farmsteads are conspicuous, and many others show indications of occupation by nonfarmers. Though nonagricultural land obviously ex- ceeds agricultural land, there is more of the latter here than in the sand lake plain. Fields remain small and square, and most are fenced, some still with pine stumps. Decrepit fences and hedgerows of trees or sumac are common. Remain- ing farmers largely engage in livestock enterprises and herds of grazing cattle are not uncommon here, in contrast to previously mentioned areas where cattle are usually con- fined to barns or feed lots. Much land now embraces wooded areas or scattered trees to the point of being classed as 301 mixed wooded and clear nonagricultural land on Figure 15, while clear nonagricultural land, though less extensive is nevertheless a major element of the landscape. Nonfarm houses with the exception of a few concen- trations of very low value units, have not appeared exten- sively as yet. Land is cheap and available, but these areas FT share the general disadvantages previously mentioned with respect to nonfarm housing development in the western part of the County. The Sand Hills Elements of the natural environment dominate the landscape complex of the sand hills to a greater degree than in the other major land types of the County, with sharp relief and heavily wooded areas tending greatly to over- shadow farmsteads and tilled land in the roughest portions. In the areas of more moderate relief, great fragmentation of agricultural and nonagricultural land is perhaps the most striking feature of the landscape. Agriculture is now obviously in decline, with many formerly tilled areas (as evidenced by the presence of aban- doned farmsteads or farmstead sites and remains of fences) having been abandoned long enough ago to allow the develop- ment of an oak-aspen forest of some commercial value. Par- tially wooded areas now in process of returning to forest are numerous and extensive throughout, and clear 302 nonagricultural plots are also numerous. There were in 1966 in Coldwater Township in the northwest, nearly all of which falls into this land type, only seven full scale, full time farmers. The frequency of occurrence of abandoned farm- steads is greater here than in any other land type, and the majority of those farmsteads still occupied, are occupied by nonfarmers. The United States Census reported the population of Coldwater Township in 1910 as 1,010 and in 1960 as 494. Mostly only the flatter areas with heavier soils are now tilled. Fields are small and most are fenced, but fences E_ are now largely nonfunctional, for while remaining cattle are pastured, few remain. Hedgerows along the fences are the rule, consisting either of trees or sumac. Large erratics are numerous and many are scattered about the fields or along the fences. Rows of boulders are sometimes piled along fences. Rectangularity of the man made landscape is probably less evident here than elsewhere in the County. The road pattern is incomplete, fields are often irregular because of slope or soil conditions, and the view is usually much obscured by forest and rough topography. Existing roads are less often improved here than elsewhere, except perhaps in the sand lake plain. Nonfarm houses are present but are very scattered, constitute a small percentage of the total, and most often consist of former farmhouses. Abandonment of land, and 303 eXpansion of the few remaining farming Operations have made many farm residences available to nonfarmers. The County's greatest contrast in general aspect of the landscape exists between the sand hills of the northwest and the silt lake plain of the southeast. In the sand hills, there is sharp relief, extensive forest, large areas of partially wooded nonagricultural land, and few farmsteads, many of which are abandoned or neglected. Man's works are least evident and his efforts appear least successful here. In the silt lake plain, there is virtually no relief, almost complete agricultural utilization of the land, and many farm- steads, most of which are occupied and well maintained. Human activity is most evident and man's efforts appear most successful here. CHAPTER X SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In the introduction to the study, it was hypothe- sized that a cultural landscape changes through time with changing culture, and that at any given moment of time, it exhibits spatial diversity related to heterogeneity of the land. It was also suggested that these phenomena are appar- ent and meaningful in microcosm as well as in macrocosm. Reconstruction and observation of the cultural landscape of Isabella County, chosen as a representative sample of the Central Michigan, support this hypothesis. Change Through Time With reSpect to change through time, the most far reaching and obvious alteration came as the white settler replaced the Indian. From.within his cultural frame of reference, the Indian perceived the sustenance potential of the land to lie with the resources of the essentially unmod— ified forest. Thus his cultural landscape departed rela- tively little from the natural landscape. On the other hand, the white settler whose culture embodied the European notion of commercial agriculture, extensive resource utilization, 304 305 and industry perceived the immediate value of the land to lie either in the agricultural potential of the hardwood forest area or in exploitation of the pine woodlands. With the exhaustion of the pine, the soil was left as the only eXploitable resource of note. By the end of the nineteenth century, the area had become sufficiently well integrated into the mainstream of the American exchange economy to make commercial agriculture a feasible enterprise, and most of the County's population was engaged in it. The forest had been largely removed, and the near ubiquitous occurrence of farmsteads, cultivated land, fences, section- line roads, and drainage ditches indicated that the white settler had succeeded in converting the wilderness into his version of civilization. ” To this point, landscape change through time, since the arrival of the white settler, had been largely the result of the replacement of one culture by another. Now, however, the same integration into the cultural domain of the Western World which had led to wide spread development of commercial agriculture and to the consequent extension of an agricultural landscape to the majority of the area, led to very considerable modification of that landscape, and time change henceforth has been related to cultural evolu- tion rather than replacement. Within the economic phase of the man-land relation- ship of the Western World, emphasis upon exchange, 306 industrialization, and commercialization of agriculture has continued to increase, and the magnitude and character of these operations change with accelerating momentum. Trans- formational activities long ago left the hands of the indi- vidual craftsman and became the domain of the highly mecha— nized industrial plant and the corporate financial structure. Commercial agriculture now seems headed in the same direc- tion. Exchange has developed to a point where the individ- ual obtains almost none of his physical needs directly from the land he occupies. Where pioneer settlers once derived their needs almost exclusively from their own land, their successors participate in a man-land system‘which is virtu- ally world wide in its ramifications. The changes which have occurred in the economic orientation of the County's population are being increasingly expressed in the rural landscape. Advancing technology has made much larger agricultural operations possible, while rising costs and rising standards of living have made ever larger farms very nearly mandatory and have at the same time greatly reduced the feasibility of agriculture in marginal lands. Productive lands are being more intensively culti- vated, while marginal lands return to forest. The number of farmers has drastically declined as a result of increased productivity per man and abandonment of former agricultural land. Most of the descendents of the early settlers who came to exploit the land, now view it as 307 desirable living Space while engaging in industrial or ser- vice occupations. Many farmsteads have been greatly modi- fied to cope with new magnitudes and modes of production, many are abandoned, and many more exhibit varying degrees of alteration as their function changes from production to res- idence. New nonfarm houses have become a major landscape . element in favorable areas. Most public buildings such as schools and churches which still remain in the rural area are now abandoned, as greater mobility of the rural population makes institutional If" consolidation and centralization feasible. Abandoned also are the surviving structures which housed rural commercial activities, established to serve the local rural resident, and these,too, are casualties of increasing mobility. New commercial establishments have appeared close to central places and along main highways, these sites having been chosen, not to serve particularly the rural population, but to gain Space and accessibility. Having observed such changes in detail in a small area such as Isabella County, one has only to travel more widely (as the writer did in the summer of 1968 through fifteen central and eastern states) or to reflect upon the universality of the underlying causa— tion to realize the broader applicability of the foregoing generalizations. In the immediate future, change through time in response to develOping culture should continue to be rapid. 308 Public function elements (roads, power lines, drainage lines, telephone lines, gas lines, etc.) may be eXpected to change and expand with technological advance and rising population in the rural area. Changing economic and technological approaches to agriculture will result in replacement or removal of obsolete farm structures. Nonfarm houses will expand in numbers with increasing attractiveness of rural residence sites to peOple who are in no way directly involved with the eXploitation of the land, and more businesses will probably move to the rural area in quest of space and easy access. Diversity in Space With regard to spatial diversity, this has been in the past, and still is at the present, a very evident char— acteristic of the rural Isabella County landscape, and it has been, and still is, definitely related to diverse char- acter of the land. That the present spatial diversity appears to be at least as marked as any in the past, seems to indicate that man's present generally indirect and far more broadly based relationship to the land has not erased its effect on his choice of enterprises and his success in their execution, both of which are expressed in landscape. Today, in those areas which are most favorable to agriculture, especially the silt lake plain, agricultural orientation is quite apparent. Nonfarm houses are few, the LAW-In . $9.1: I‘I‘fl w 309 land is intensively devoted to high yielding cash crops, the farmsteads are numerous and mostly well maintained, rectangu- larity of landscape (resulting from the land survey system) is most obvious, and in general man and his evidently suc- cessful enterprises completely dominate the landscape. In those areas which are least favorable to agricul- ture, such as the sand hills, cultivated land is a minor landscape element. Some of the land was never completely cleared and devoted to agriculture subsequent to removal of the pine and now bears an oak-aspen replacement forest. Much land that was once under cultivation is now in various stages of returning to forest. Farmsteads are comparatively few, often they are poorly maintained, many are obviously occupied by nonfarmers, and many are entirely abandoned. In general man and his works do not dominate this landscape. In the till plain areas where some land has proven amenable to cultivation and some has not, there is still evidence of agricultural orientation, but of a different type and magnitude than in the silt lake plain. The arable land is less intensively cultivated, wooded areas are more conSpicuous, the present or past dominance of livestock enterprises is evident, farmsteads are generally less well maintained and more often occupied by nonfarmers, and more nonfarm houses are present. In the lake plain east of Mt. Pleasant, where loca- tion is not a differentiating factor, the influence of land 310 type on the development of nonfarm residence is clear cut. Nonfarm houses are many times more numerous in the compara- tively cheap land of the sand lake plain than in the eXpen- sive land of the silt lake plain. In the future, landscape diversity will probably increase. There seems to be no indication at present that the highly productive portions of the silt lake plain and till plain will not remain in agricultural use. On the other hand, agriculture may be expected to continue its decline in the sandy lands, possibly to the point of virtual nonexistence, and the return to forest here could become as complete as it is now in many areas of thin rocky soil in New England. In the favorable agricultural areas, present trends point to the eventual replacement of the old farmsteads by a relatively small number of highly specialized establishments bearing little resemblance to their predecessors. Perhaps consolidation of holdings and lack of available building plots in these lands could result in fewer residences and a declining population, though complicating factors such as family ties, existing amenities, proximity to employment, and continued occupance of old, but updated farmhouses make such a prediction hazardous. In the lands where agriculture is in decline, nonfarm houses will very probably replace farmsteads as the dominant feature of the cultural landscape. 311 The land availability factor here could conceivably lead to an increasing population even in the more remote areas, thus reversing the trend of the recent period. APP END IX APPENDIX For the purposes of this study, the rural landscape is divided into two primary categories of elements. One of these is made up of those spatially extensive components which occupy the great majority of the land and which do not involve shelter for a human activity, while the other em- braces those which do provide shelter for some activity and which are prominent features of the landscape, though occupy- ing a relatively small part of the total area. Subcategori- zation has been carried out as follows: I. Spatially extensive elements involving no sheltering structures. A. Land having a public function, chiefly transporta— tion lines, public utilities in the usual sense, and drainage lines. B. Land put to agricultural use through tillage pro- cesses and classified according to the intensity to which agricultural uses occupy a given parcel of land, as below: 1. Maximum intensity, meaning near complete agri- cultural use of land existing in regularly shaped blocks, no smaller than one-half section (square mile). 2. Major intensity, meaning that agriculture is obviously dominant within the designated plot, but that nonagricultural elements, consisting mostly of wooded and partially wooded areas are also conspicuously present, or that due to the presence of nonagricultural elements, agricul- tural land is fragmented to the point where there are no regularly shaped blocks as large as one-half section. 312 if 313 3. Intermediate intensity, meaning that within the designated plot, agricultural and nonagricul- tural elements are nearly in balance (small ' total area). 4. Minimum intensity, meaning that agricultural use of the land is negligible or entirely absent. (Differentiation according to type of agricul- tural use is also made, to the extent of dis— tinguishing areas where cash cropping is the chief enterprise of the full time farmers from those where livestock enterprises are dominant. This is done by enclosing the relatively small cash crop areas by a line on the agricultural land use map.) Land other than that involved in Category I,A and Category II, which does not have an agricultural function, and which is called "nonagricultural land." It is classified both according to intensity of occurrence and type as below: 1. Maximum intensity, meaning near complete non- agricultural status of the land, and subcate- gorized as follows: a. Forested. b. Clear or nearly clear nonagricultural land. c. Mixed wooded and clear nonagricultural land and marsh land. d. Other (air ports, golf courses, cemetaries, etc.). 2. Intermediate intensity, meaning as in classifica- tion of agricultural land, that agricultural and nonagricultural areas are nearly in balance. Nonagricultural land of this category is usually wooded or partially wooded. 3. Minor intensity, meaning that nonagricultural land, while still a conspicuous part of the landscape, occupies a minor portion of the parcel in question. This nonagricultural land is also usually wooded or partially wooded. 4. Minimum intensity, meaning that nonagricultural components here reach their smallest extent and are inconspicuous or perhaps nearly nonexistant. ‘lr (Om-Mr” 7. . 314 (It is recognized that other Category I lands exist, but these are unique to certain locations, occupy little space, contribute little to the overall landscape, and would be cumbersome to treat here, hence they are generally ignored.) II. Structureserected to provide shelter for a human activ- ity, along with the land they occupy. They are sub— categorized as follows: A. Farmsteads. (Residence of the farmer plus struc- tures to shelter processes, equipment, products, or livestock.) They are subcategorized as below: 1. Farmsteads in use for essentially the purpose for which they were originally designed, with minimum modification, termed "minimum modifica- tion farmsteads." 2. Farmsteads extensively modified, either for a new function or the expansion of a previous one, termed "modified farmsteads." 3. New farmsteads, whose design is in keeping with post World War II technology, termed "new farm- steads." 4. Farmsteads whose form remains essentially unchanged, but whose function has changed, termed "modified function farmsteads." 5. Farmsteads in which only the residence is in use, termed "residence use farmsteads." 6. Farmsteads in which the residence is unused, termed "abandoned residence farmsteads." 7. Farmsteads of which no dynamic use is being made, termed "abandoned farmsteads." B. Nonfarm residences. (Houses either originally unassociated with farm.buildings or once associated with farm buildings which have been removed.) They are subcategorized according to the approximate time of their appearance as follows: 1. Early, prior to the middle 1920's. 2. Prewar, prior to the end of World War II, but Since the middle 1920's. H r. I 315 3. Postwar, since the end of World War II, up to the middle 1950's. 4. New, since the middle 1950's. C. Mobile homes. D. Public and commercial buildings, subcategorized as below: 1. Abandoned. 2. Old. 3. New (within last decade). The procedure followed in the subcategorization of I,B and I,C elements of the landscape (agricultural and non— agricultural land) was first to drive all roads and to map the categories entirely through visual appraisal of the actual landscape, though designating some transitional areas as questionable. The second step was to examine aerial photographs taken in 1965 to determine whether the general impression gained from the roads could be substantiated by comparison with the pattern as it appeared from the air. On the whole, little discrepancy was noted, though in a few cases, usually due to some type of visual illusion or inabil- ity to see the interior of an area, the road impression was obviously distorted, and the categorization was changed to bring it into accord with reality. Next, sample sections or one-half sections (in the land survey sense of one square mile) in each category was chosen by reference to a table of random numbers and measure- ments of land use taken. By this method, the range of the 316 percentage relationship between agriculture and nonagricul- tural land in each category was computed, and final boundary determination made on this basis. Actually, the only bound— ary needing any degree of mathematical resolution was that between the maximum and major intensity categories of agri- cultural land (minimum and minor intensities of nonagricul— F“ tural land) which do grade into each other, as shown in Tables 5 and 6 by the lack of any gap between the extremes of the categories, and where an arbitrary break point (the midpoint between the means of the two groups of samples was EV chosen) thus sometimes becomes necessary if a boundary is to be drawn. No other real boundary problem exists, both because the intermediate intensity categories are small, and also because a gap exists between the extreme samples of the intermediate and the extremes of the intensity categories immediately above and below. This gap is small between the intermediate and major intensity agricultural (intermediate and minor nonagricultural) being only 1.5 percentage points, but it is very large between the intermediate and minimum agricultural (intermediate and maximum nonagricultural). Both this large gap and the small extent of the intermediate categories are due to a tendency to make either considerable agricultural use of the land or else very little. The great bulk of land parcels are either over 75 percent or under 10 percent in agricultural use. 317 Sampling was done on a township basis, as a means of arriving at a stratified random sample. In the case of each category except the intermediate, 20 percent of all full or half sections falling within the category, or a minimum of one full or half section was selected as the sample. In both intermediate categories, all sections or half sections p falling therein were used, because of the small extent of the category. In mapping the distribution of agricultural and non— agricultural lands, forty acres was chosen as the minimum V plot. Forty acres is a very small area on Figure 14 or Figure 15, but the smallest area possible was chosen in an attempt to reveal the extreme fragmentation which exists in some parts of the County. LIST OF REFERENCES .‘ a ‘ Er.“ {fl LIST OF REFERENCES Articles Brewster, John M. "Farm Technological Advance and Total Population Growth," Journal of Farm Economics, XXVII (August 1945), 509-525. ' Day, J. E. "Sketch of the Settlement and Growth of Isabella County," Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, XXVII (1887), 324-327. Decker, Keith M. "Early Pioneer Homesteads in Central Michigan," Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, XLIV (1959), 315-321. Dustin, Fred. "The Treaty of Saginaw," Michigan History Magazine, IV (1920), 243-277. Hazleton, George H. "Reminiscences of Seventeen Years Residence in Michigan," Michigan Pioneer and Historigal Collecgions, XXI (1892), 370-418. Miller, George J. "Some Geographical Influences in the Settlement of Michigan and the Distribution of Its Population," Bulletin of the American Geographical Society, XLV, No. 5 (1913), 321-348. Wolfort, Ira. "Look What They've Done to Chickens," American Agriculturalist and the Rgral New Xorker, May 1967, p. 22. Books Atlas and Farm.Directory of Isabella County, Miphigan. Chicago: Standard Map. Co., 1915. Atlas of Isabella County, Michigan. Philadelphia: C. O. Titus Co., 1879. 318 319 Biederman, Paul (ed.). The Economic Aimanac, 1967-1968. Business Fact Book. New Ybrk: The National Industrial Conference Board, 1967. Brown, Ralph H. Historical Geography of the United States. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1947. Dunbar, Willis F. Michigan: A History of the Wolverine State. Grand Rapids: William B. Erdmans Publishing Co., 1965. Fancher, Isaac A. Past gnd Present ofgisabella County. Indianapolis: B. F. Brown and Co., 1911. Fuller, George N. Michiganl a Centenniginistory‘of the State and its People. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co., 1939. Hargreaves, Irene, and Foehl, Harold M. The Story of Logging the White Pine in the Saginaw Valley. Bay City: The Red Keg Press, 1964. Higbee, Edward. Farms and Farmers_in an Urban Age. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund, 1963. Hinsdale, W. B. Archaeoiogicai Atlas of Michigan. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1931. . Distribution of the Original Population of Michigan. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1932. . Primitive Man in Michigan. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1925. Hoffman, Lawrence A. Economic Geography. New York: Ronald Press Co., 1965. Hubbard, Bella. Memorigls of a Half Century. New Ybrk and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1887. Johnson, Ida Amanda. The Michigan Fgr Trade. Lansing: Micigan Historical Commission, 1919. Maybee, Rolland H. Michigan's White Pine Era, 1840-1900. A John H. Munson Michigan Historical Fund Publication. Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1960. Michigan State Gazeteer and Business Directory. Vol. VII. Detroit: R. I. Polk and Co., 1885. 320 Michigan Writer's Program, W.P.A. "Archaeology and Indians," Michigan, a Guide to the Wolveripe State. Reprinted in Charles M. Davis, Readings in the Geographygof Michigan. Ann Arbor: Ann Arbor Publishers, 1964. Plat Book of Isabella County, Michigan. Minneapolis: C. M. Foote Co., 1899. Portrait and Bipgraphical Album of Isabella County, Michigan. Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1884. Sorr, Maximilian. "La notion de genre de vie et sa valeur actuelle," Annales de Geographig, LVII (1948), 97-108. Translated and reprinted in Philip L. Wagner and Marvin W. Mikesell (eds. and trans.), Readings in Cultural Geography. Chicago: Univer- sity of Chicago Press, 1962, pp. 397—415. Webb, Walter Prescot. The Great Plains. Boston, New YOrk, Chicago: Ginn and Co., 1931. Veatch,J. O. Soils and Lands of Michigan. East Lansing: Michigan State College Press, 1953. m Martin, Helen M. Mgp of the Surface Formations of the Southern Peninsula of Michigan. Publication 49. Department of Conservation, Geological Survey Division, 1955. Veatch, J. O. Presettlement Forest in Michigan. East Lansing: Department of Resource Development, Michigan State University, 1959. Newspapers Isabella County Enterprise. Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Issues of June 29, 1888, April 12, 1895, and May 7, 1897. The Northern Pioneer. Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Issue of June 7, 1865. Northwestern Tribune. Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Issue of October 30, 1891. Kerr, 321 Public Documents J. A., and Trull, F. W. Soil Survey of Isabella County, Michigan. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, in cooperation with the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station. No. 36, Series 1923. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1928. U. S. Bureau of the Census. Thirteenth Census of the United States: 1910. Abstract of the Census with Supple- ment for Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1913. . Fourteenth Census of the United States: 1920. Vols. I and VI. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1921 and 1922. . Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930. Population, Vol. I; Agriculture, Vol. III, Part 1. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931 and 1932. . Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940. Population, Vol. I; Agriculture, Vol. I. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1942. . Seventeenth Census of the United States: 1950. Population, Vol. II, Part 22, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1952. . Eighteenth Census of the United States: 1960. Population, Vol. I, Part 24, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963. . Uniteg_§tates Census of Agriculture: 1925. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1927. . United States Census of Agriculture: 1935. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1936. . United States Census of Agriculture: 945 l 0 Vol. I, Part 6, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Govern— ment Printing Office, 1946. . United States Census of Agriculture: 1950. Vol. I, Part 6, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1952. 322 U. S. Bureau of the Census. United States Census of Agricul- ture: 1954. Vol. I, Part 6, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1956. . United States Census of Agriculture: 1959. Vol. I, Part 13, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1961. . United States Census of Agriculture: 1964. Vol. I, Part 13, Michigan. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. U. S. Census Office, 1860 Census. Population Schedules (original manuscript). National Archives, Microc0py T-7, Roll 119. Michigan, Ionia (part), Kent (part). . 1870 Census. Population Schedules (original manuscript). National Archives, Microcopy T-8, Roll 168. Michigan, Ionia (part), Kent (part). . 1880 Census. Population Schedules (original manuscript). National Archives, Microcopy T-9, Roll 584. Michigan, Ionia (part), Isle Royal. . Eighth Census of the United States: 1860. Population, Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1864. . Compendium of the Ninth Census. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1872. . Compendium of the Tenth Census. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1883. . Tenth Census of the United States: 1880. Population, Vol. I; Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1883. . Eleventh Census of the United States: i890. Population, Vol. I; Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1895. . Twelfth Census of the United States: 1900. Vol. I, Part 1; Vol. V, Part 1. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1901. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics, 1962. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963. 323 U. S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics, 1966. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. . Year Book of Agriculture, 1960. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1960. Research Reports Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. "Economic Prospects of Farmers," Project '80 Rural Michigan Now and in 1980. Research Report 47. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1966. "Farm Machinery and Farm Labor," Project '80 Rural Michigan Now and in 1980. Research Report 48. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1966. Unpublished Material Carey, Joseph Patrick. "The Agricultural Geography of the Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, Area." Unpublished Master's dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Chicago, 1932. Jones, Dallas Lee. "The Survey and Sale of Public Land in Michigan." Master's dissertation, Cornell University, 1952. (Microfilmed.) Land transfer records maintained in the office of the Register of Deeds of Isabella County, Michigan. Records of drainage work maintained in the office of Drain Commissioner of Isabella County, Michigan. gaited States Field Notes, Northern and Western Michigan. Vols. XLVIII, XLIX, L, and LI. Michigan Department of Conservation, Lands Division, Lansing, Michigan. (Manuscript.) Woodworth, Ellen L. A typescript prepared by the Clark Historical Library, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Consists of a collection of correSpondence between Ellen Woodworth and her husband, Samuel Woodworth, serving with a corps of Engineers in the Union Army, 1863-1865. 324 Personal:intervigys Adams, Robert. Farmer, Coe Township and President of the Shepherd State Bank. .August 1967. Bacon, Eugene. U. S. Soil Conservation Service, Isabella County, January 1967. Benn, Frank. Retired farmer, Sherman Township, November 1967. Beutler, Clyde. Supervisor of Sherman Township, August 1966. Beutler, James. Chairman of the U. S. Department of Agricul- ture Stabilization and Conservation Committee, Isabella County, August 1967. Boge, Pauline. Formerly of rural Nottawa Township, November 1967. Bowen, Lewis. Supervisor of Coldwater Township, July 1966. Burgraff, Henry. Retired farmer, formerly of Chippewa Town- ship, January 1968. Chaffin, Walter. Farmer, Coe Township, August 1967. Epple, Cecil. Supervisor of Denver Township, August 1966. Estes, Bert. Retired farmer, Coldwater Township, July 1967. Farrell, Leon. Supervisor of Rolland Township, August 1967. Foster, John. Work Unit Conservationist, U. S. Soil Conser- vation Service, Isabella County, January 1967. Foults, Harriet. Formerly of Sherman Township, December 1967. Galer, Reger. Supervisor of Broomfield Township, August 1966. Geeck, Perry. Supervisor of Wise Township, August 1966. Gordon, Murray. Farmer, Wise Township, September 1967. Hawkins, Burton. Farmer, Lincoln Township, January 1967. House, Oliver. Supervisor of Isabella Township. August 1966. 325 Irwin, Ernest. Supervisor of Vernon Township. August 1966. Johnson, Clare. Treasurer of Lincoln Township, August 1966. Kyser, Ida. Resident of rural Lincoln Township, January 1968. Laverty, John. Supervisor of Gilmore Township, August 1966. McDonald, Fred R. Clerk of Union Township, September 1966. McLaghlan, Emery. Resident of rural Vernon Township, November 1967. McQueen, Daisy. Formerly of rural Fremont Township, August 1967. Millard, David. Supervisor of Deerfield Township, August 1966. Moore, Austin. Farmer, Wise Township, November 1967. Preston, Harold. Isabella County Abstract Co., July 1967. Salisbury, Elton. Supervisor of Coe Township, September 1966. Schafer, Peter and Elizabeth. Retired farmer and wife. Former road commissioner of Nottawa Township, November 1967. Schmidt, Ernest. Supervisor of Nottawa Township, August 1966. Smith, Sherman. Supervisor of Lincoln Township, August 1966. Swindlehurst, Hugh and Marie. Farmer and wife of Isabella Township, November 1967. Taylor, Allison. Farmer, Rolland Township, November 1967. Tillman, Anthony. Merchant, Beal City, January 1968. Uebele, Gerald. Merchant, Rolland Township, August 1966. Watson, Delmer. Supervisor of Chippewa Township, August 1966. Wheeler, George. Resident of rural Union Township, Professor Emeritus of Agriculture, Central Michigan University, November 1967. 326 Wood, Alvin. Farmer, Gilmore Township, August 1966. Woodruff, Fred. Retired farmer, Broomfield Township, November 1967. Woodruff, Mrs. Herbert. Resident of Deerfield Township, November 1967. Young, Leon. Supervisor of Fremont Township, August 1966. Zalud, Charles. Engineer, Isabella County Road Commission, August 1967. ’Varfi ‘VKQL ‘. / $779.10, («Pl/I, til? IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _/_/_l/ __J_____ MAJOR LAND TYPES ”'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII“ MAJOR LAND TYPES SUPPLEMENTAI-W v— "a ERIAI “rv 4r4(pyr a" I 7 L >v r ) L r . < . 4 ‘ q ‘4‘ 4 . .1- . .5 'L'rt .-. I)“ .I. I V . ifiZLML r .5. :3: any)? ( A" ._ ‘7 I \ \ I a. .\ . ‘3:1>."~ I .1: )u‘ \\\ I Z ’’’’ J>V\ I u 11‘s. / 3 v ‘ N «I u, r—IAJ r \ . \ ; w , ..; ‘ , Vt . \ 24‘ ,, I- \. wh" V 4)‘ \I \:§%/ %' Ny/Z/fl/ // \\ A J II §§Z§§§\\\W 41;:SI‘IL,:’ if“ Affirflvla :5: \\\V§\\\\\\\\\\\ I} I 3%; \ 0:31” \\:< h 4» ) 7‘ \‘x I \ x I \ ‘\ lag? ’53.”:152352 7. ///’ ' ...... ,7 ‘“¢""272 2.33;“ ' \ N p 7///////A FLAT CLAY AND SILT LOAM PLAINS . ‘= ‘ FLAT, PREDOMINATELY WET SAND PLAINS — \\\\\\V UNDULATING CLAY AND SILT LOAM PLAINS _ W FLAT TO UNDULATING, PREDOMINATELY _______________ DRY SAND PLAINS AREA LOCATION _HILL LANDS, PREDOMINATELY CLAYS EXTENSIVE MUCK AND PEAT Hfiégms izi’gI-IILL LANDS, PREDOMINATELY SANDS M III . / 44%» // 77/7 \v/A \) / . , V Z/ / -. W4, , M \\ ‘7¥\ / I \7; EXPRESSWAY PAVED ROAD GRAVEL ROAD DIRT ROAD RAILROAD WATERCOURSE WATERBODY CITY or VILLAGE F ig ure 1 "IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIs