1832 Wisconsin forest records

[Prizl tha Chizl]

For folks who are interested in learning about what was growing in their area 200 years ago, a buddy who was working on a tree ring study related to Wisconsin burn history mentioned these records to me a few years ago, and I found they're  now digitalized here.. https://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/SurveyNotes/SurveyNotesHome.html

These are the survey notes from Lyons original 1832-1866 survey of Wisconsin. You can search the records by township and section number. They recorded the trees found at every section corner, as well as their diameter. 

I found that the quality of the notes really varies depending on the surveyor writing the records, some of them are almost illegible, some have quite a bit of information. If you don't find what your looking for at your site, browse the neighboring sections or townships, it may be better.

Use this info how you'd like, I think it's cool to learn about the forests the Native American foresters produced.

Where I'm at, (SW Wisconsin, Iowa county near the river,) it was mostly white oak, burr oak, prairie. It would be cool to hear what you find in your neck of the woods or other thoughts on the usefulness of these records.

[Ron Scott]

Well done! Great information made more accessible.

[Otis1]

These have been digitized for a few years now, but good job finding them. They can be difficult to read like you said. The website is the Wisconsin BCPL (Board of Commissioners of Public Land) they control the state's school trust lands that were given to all the states about 100 years ago. I'm not a history major, so someone can correct if I'm wrong. It is managed completely separate from DNR state lands.

One of their properties contains the remnants of the MacArthur Pine, once the largest white pine in Wisconsin. The conference table in their office is built from the tree.

[wisconsitom]

For many a year, I had the original vegetation of Wisconsin map, based on the original survey notes, in my office at work.  Pretty much the bible.

I wanna throw out this fun little mini quiz for my fellow sconnies and everyone else;. What was the single most common tree in Wisconsin prior to European settlement?

I'll be standing by, ready to blow your minds.

BTW, for Minnesota, it was the tamarack.

[rusticretreater]

Hemlock.

[wisconsitom]

@rusticretreater that was quick, and correct!

[barbender]

 That is interesting. I had read that hemlock was very common in Wisconsin, in fact I read a book that I can't remember the name of, written by an old time Wisconsin logger who was cutting primarily hemlock in the early 1900's. They would cut it, and iirc in the spring they would strip the bark and pile it up to dry. The bark was the primary product as it was used in tanneries.

 Tamarack is somewhat of an unseen tree here, owing to the fact that most of them grow in swamps and bogs. I read that the loss to tamarack saw fly is comparable to pine beetle loss in the West, it's just that you can't see it because it's in the middle of a massive swamp instead of on the side of a mountain.

[wisconsitom]

Yes, millions of hemlocks felled only for their bark.  Trainloads of hemlock bark shipped south to tanneries in Milwaukee.

In another thread, I mentioned the area around Wausau, Merril, and so on.  That's the best hemlock area I tend to see.  Guess there's a real nice stand on one of the Apostle Islands that somehow got missed!

[Prizl tha Chizl]

I remember reading about the great hemlock forests. Still a small old growth stand not too far from me up by La Farge. So when I ordered conifers this spring for a small windbreak/softwood regeneration planting I found the State nursery had none. Why isn't Wi DNR interested in planting hemlock? (Other than that the tanneries have disappeared/moved to chemicals?