<<back
Abstracts:
ERICKSON to GASKILL - PAGE 3 OF 7
BLUEMTN4
Erickson, M. L. 1906. Report: Blue Mountain Forest
Reserve (E). Unpublished typescript report obtained from the National
Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place of publication
unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service]. Variable
p.
Abstract: After establishment of the forest
reserves and national forests early in the twentieth century,
inspections were supposed to be made at regular intervals. Initially,
inspections were conducted by Forest Inspectors stationed at the
District (Regional) Offices. Later, that responsibility was transferred
to the Forest Supervisors, who were responsible for inspecting
their own Forest (see G. H. Cecil, 1910, “Memorandum regarding
Supervisor’s inspections” for more information). This
forest reserve inspection report was prepared by an inspector
from the District Office; it includes the following sections:
timber sales (24 p.); products (1 p.); grazing (14 p.); claims
and privileges (16 p.); additions and eliminations (3 p.); and
personnel, equipment, and protection (37 p.)
BLUEMTN5
Erickson, M. L. 1906. Report on Blue Mountains
(West) Reserve, Oregon. Unpublished typescript report obtained from
the National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place
of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service]. Variable p.
Abstract: After establishment of the forest
reserves and national forests early in the twentieth century,
inspections were supposed to be made at regular intervals. Initially,
inspections were conducted by Forest Inspectors stationed at the
District (Regional) Offices. Later, that responsibility was transferred
to the Forest Supervisors, who were responsible for inspecting
their own Forest (see G. H. Cecil, 1910, “Memorandum regarding
Supervisor’s inspections” for more information). This
forest reserve inspection report was prepared by an inspector
from the District Office; it includes the following sections:
timber sales (22 p.); boundaries (5 p.); privileges and claims
(5 p.); dendrology (1 p.); planting (1 p.); products (2 p.); protection
and equipment (19 p.); and allotments and expenses (3 p.). The
Blue Mountains West Reserve included lands in the Malheur, Ochoco,
Umatilla, and Deschutes (?) National Forests. It includes interesting
insights about early conditions in the Blue Mountains, as illustrated
with this quote: “The forest in the region south of the
Strawberry range that bears excellent yellow pine and tamarack
covers approximately 800,000 acres. The yellow pine is more abundant
and is found in more suitable situations on this reserve than
I have seen its occurrence in any other part of Oregon. It grows
tall and straight, maintains a uniform taper, and furnishes a
large percentage of clear length. Trees thirty to fifty inches
in diameter, with height of 150 feet, are not uncommon.”
WALLOWA1
Erickson, M. L. 1906. Report on Wallowa Forest
Reserve, Oregon. Unpublished typescript report obtained from the
National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place of
publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service].
Variable p.
Abstract: After establishment of the forest
reserves and national forests early in the twentieth century,
inspections were supposed to be made at regular intervals. Initially,
inspections were conducted by Forest Inspectors stationed at the
District (Regional) Offices. Later, that responsibility was transferred
to the Forest Supervisors, who were responsible for inspecting
their own Forest (see G. H. Cecil, 1910, “Memorandum regarding
Supervisor’s inspections” for more information). This
forest reserve inspection report was prepared by an inspector
from the District Office; it consists of a series of smaller documents
covering the following topics: timber sales (9 p.); claims and
privileges (4 p.); protection (10 p.); personnel (10 p.); and
grazing (11 p.).
CHESNIM2
Erickson, M. L. 1907. Report on Chesnimnus Forest
Reserve, Oregon. Unpublished typescript report obtained from the
National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place of
publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service].
Variable p.
Abstract: After establishment of the forest
reserves and national forests early in the twentieth century,
inspections were supposed to be made at regular intervals. Initially,
inspections were conducted by Forest Inspectors stationed at the
District (Regional) Offices. Later, that responsibility was transferred
to the Forest Supervisors, who were responsible for inspecting
their own Forest (see G. H. Cecil, 1910, “Memorandum regarding
Supervisor’s inspections” for more information). This
forest reserve inspection report was prepared by an inspector
from the District Office; it includes the following sections:
protection, equipment, personnel (16 p.); grazing (6 p.); boundaries
(7 p.); timber sales (16 p.); claims (9 p.); planting (2 p.);
privileges (7 p.); and products (2 p.).
HEPPNER2
Erickson, M. L. 1907. Report on Heppner, Oregon,
National Forest. Unpublished typescript report obtained from the
National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place of
publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service].
Variable p.
Abstract: After establishment of the forest
reserves and national forests early in the twentieth century,
inspections were supposed to be made at regular intervals. Initially,
inspections were conducted by Forest Inspectors stationed at the
District (Regional) Offices. Later, that responsibility was transferred
to the Forest Supervisors, who were responsible for inspecting
their own Forest (see G. H. Cecil, 1910, “Memorandum regarding
Supervisor’s inspections” for more information). This
national forest inspection report was prepared by an inspector
from the District Office; it includes the following sections:
[timber] sales (10 p.); silvics (9 p.); grazing (24 p.); boundaries
(2 p.); protection and improvement (27 p.); equipment (2 p.);
and organization (13 p.). Erickson offers some interesting insights
in this work, as illustrated by this quote: “Game is not
at all abundant. The cause of the lack of deer and other game
is probably due to the annual hunt of the Warm Springs and Umatilla
Indians who come into the country en masse with large bands of
horses. The Forest officers should see that each Indian complies
with the game laws.”
WALLOWA6
Erickson, M. L. 1907. Supplementary report on Wallowa
Forest Reserve, Oregon. Unpublished typescript report obtained from
the National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place
of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service]. Variable p.
Abstract: After establishment of the forest
reserves and national forests early in the twentieth century,
inspections were supposed to be made at regular intervals. Initially,
inspections were conducted by Forest Inspectors stationed at the
District (Regional) Offices. Later, that responsibility was transferred
to the Forest Supervisors, who were responsible for inspecting
their own Forest (see G. H. Cecil, 1910, “Memorandum regarding
Supervisor’s inspections” for more information). This
forest reserve inspection report was prepared by an inspector
from the District Office; it supplements information contained
in Erickson’s primary report on the Wallowa (1906). It includes
the following sections: boundaries (3 p.); protection (3 p.);
personnel and improvements (5 p.); timber sales (4 p.); and privileges
(4 p.).
WHITMAN12
Ericson, O. F.; Conover, C. J. 1918. Descriptive
report: Upper North Fork timber survey project. Unpublished typescript
report obtained from the National Archives, College Park, MD; record
group 95. [Place of publication unknown]: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Whitman National Forest. 10 p.
Abstract: Five small forest areas totaling
2,015.92 acres, located in T. 10 S., R. 35½ and 36 E.,
and T. 11 S., R. 36 E. were cruised during March 1918. The examined
areas were scattered over the upper part of the North Fork Burnt
River drainage, except for part of the “Tipton chance”
which lapped over the ridge and drains west to the John Day River.
The areas were widely separated, so that each one comprised a
separate logging chance. The chances varied in size from 80 to
1,050 acres and all were very accessible. All of the timber was
tributary, by siding or spur, to the Sumpter Valley narrow-gauge
railroad. A color map shows the location of the cruised areas,
all of which were fairly close to Whitney in the Sumpter Valley.
The examined areas consisted primarily of cancelled claims scattered
among the patented (private) land in the valley. The yellow pine
type covered 1,461 acres and 97% of it was mature, comprising
practically all of the merchantable timber in the logging chances.
The yellow pine timber was 10,333 board feet per merchantable
acre. Several interesting tables summarize the species composition
and volumes encountered on the tracts. One table summarized the
North Fork, Camp 3, and Whitney chances; it showed that the total
number of stems per acre was 49, with 31 of those being yellow
pine ranging from 4 to 32 inches DBH, with the remaining 18 stems
being lodgepole pines in the 4-7” and 8-11” diameter
classes. For the Tipton tract, the total stocking was 69 stems,
with 25 being yellow pine (4-36 inches), 13 Douglas-fir (4-20”),
4 western larch (4-14”), 9 white fir (4-11”), and
18 lodgepole pine (4-11”). On the Tipton chance, about 5%
of the trees were fire scarred, but on the other areas about 20%
were so affected. Some evidence of insect killed trees and recent
windthrow was also noted on the areas. The examiners noted that
many areas had an open understory of lodgepole pine beneath the
mature yellow pine overstory. The authors did not know if overgrazing,
fires, or natural causes could be used to explain the lodgepole
pine reproduction under a yellow pine overstory, although they
believed that by protecting the area carefully after logging,
the yellow pine would eventually prevail over the shorter-lived
lodgepole. However, they recommended the situation be closely
monitored since encroachment by lodgepole pine was noted as a
problem in many localities. In the Tipton chance especially, they
noted that every effort should be made to keep the area as a yellow
pine forest by discouraging the advance growth of lodgepole pine.
They recommended that slash be piled and burned following logging,
except in the open stands near juniper barrens where lopping and
scattering should be thoroughly tried since it should effectively
conserve moisture for regenerating seedlings. The larch-Douglas-fir
type was indefinite in these tracts since Douglas-fir grew most
often with yellow pine and larch was commonly associated with
lodgepole pine. It was observed that larch dwarf mistletoe seems
to suppress and kill much of the western larch in the area and
seldom were larch trees able to reach merchantable size. A stand
table is provided for the fir-larch forest type. Pure lodgepole
pine was minor, occurring mostly on moist sites in the Tipton
area. It was notable that lodgepole pine was extending itself
aggressively. Many small groups of dead lodgepole pines were observed,
having been killed by insects (Dendroctonus monticola). Juniper
barrens (found on dry, rocky ridges), grass and sagebrush communities
at lower elevations, three meadows (37 acres), and brushy river
bottoms (54 acres) also occurred in the tracts. The report ends
with a series of tables summarizing snags by section (within townships
and ranges), areas and volumes by section, volume by logging chances
and species, and types of logging chances.
WALLOWA7
Evans, R. M. 1912. General silvical report: Wallowa
and Minam Forests. Unpublished typescript report obtained from the
National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Place of
publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service].
54 p.
Abstract: This report includes the following
sections: list of coniferous trees; list of deciduous trees; list
of shrubs; general description of topography and soil; fundamental
forest types; general silvical description of vegetation zones
(yellow pine, transition, alpine, and arctic-alpine or timberless
zones); silvics of individual species; and silvical problems.
A variety of silvical characteristics are described for each species
(habit, occurrence, soil and moisture, shade tolerance, growth
and longevity, reproduction, susceptibility to injury, etc.).
The descriptions of the vegetation zones, including predominant
forest types associated with each of them, are especially thorough.
It provides interesting observations about plant succession, as
illustrated with this quote: “There are patches of “scabland,”
characterized by very shallow soil, many rock fragments and a
total absence of vegetation except in the spring months. It is
interesting to note that some of these areas are being occupied
by sagebrush where a few years ago, there was none. A possible
explanation is that the annual fires of the Indians kept it killed
out and now it has a chance to develop. Yellow pine is slowly
encroaching upon the sagebrush, the chief factor in its rate of
advance being moisture, provided fire is kept out. The same statement
will hold true in regard to the other open areas as well. As fast
as the reproduction has pushed out from under the protection of
the parent trees, the periodical fires have killed it back, thus
keeping the timber line practically stationary. In recent years,
conditions have improved, and it is noticeable that the pine is
reaching out, although slowly. The north slopes [are] being occupied
by a thick stand of fir reproduction. Even pine is gaining a foothold
here, and is gradually creeping across the ridge to the south
slopes.”
UMATILLA21
Ewing, Carl. 1939 (November 21). Memorandum: historical
information about the Umatilla National Forest. Unpublished Report.
Pendleton, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Region, Umatilla National Forest. 6 p.
Abstract: This accession consists of a 1-page
memorandum by Forest Supervisor Carl Ewing, and a 5-page enclosure
providing the following historical information about the Umatilla
National Forest: location; forest description; forest contribution
to community welfare; administration (Asotin District, Touchet
District, Walla Walla District, Meacham District, Ukiah District,
Heppner District); and history (Heppner Forest Reserve, Blue Mountain
Forest Reserve, Wenaha Forest Reserve).
FARQUHAR
Farquhar, Henry H. 1912. Western white pine seed
collection, fall of 1911. Unpublished typescript report obtained
from the National Archives, College Park, MD; record group 95. [Missoula,
MT]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region].
40 p.
Abstract: This interesting report describes
a very large seed collection program that occurred in the fall
of 1911 on the Kaniksu National Forest in northern Idaho. Most
of the collections occurred on the West Branch of the Priest River,
due north of the towns of Priest River and Newport, Washington.
The objective was to collect 20,000 bushels of western white pine,
although no particular reason was given for a program of that
size (perhaps due to increased planting and seeding needs following
the extensive forest fires of 1910?). The report mentions that
western white pine had an exceptionally large crop of cones in
1911, whereas other species had a correspondingly low cone crop
that year. This meant that squirrel caching was confined almost
exclusively to white pine and, since most collecting was from
squirrel caches, this combination of circumstances was viewed
as ideal for a large seed collection program. This report includes
the following major sections: introduction; organization; the
work; criticism; data; and costs. It includes detailed information
on production rates, costs, labor forces, logistics, cone shipment
forms, etc. A portion of a small-scale map of the Kaniksu (dated
1911) shows the actual areas from which cones were collected.
Ten high-quality black-and-white photographs are included, several
of which are 8" x 10" in size. Humorous accounts of
camp life, Swedish laborers, union agitation among the pickers,
competition between the pickers and squirrels for the cones (including
squirrels robbing cones from sealed cone sacks), and other aspects
of the project are provided in the report.
FLORY1
Flory, Charles H. 1910. Organization of national
forest force. Unpublished Typescript Paper. Portland, OR: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Pacific District. 33 p.
Abstract: This long paper, which was delivered
at the District 6 Supervisor’s Meeting on March 22, 1910,
begins with a history of forestry in the world, including the
history, administration, and organization of forestry programs
in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. The author uses the historical
context as a way to set the stage for his recommendations concerning
the training and organization of the national forest work force.
Two types of organization had been tried to that point on Pacific
Northwest national forests: one involved dividing the forest into
many small Districts, with each Ranger in the work force being
assigned the administration of a particular District. If 10 Rangers
are employed on the forest, then the forest would have 10 Districts.
On other forests, the forest is divided into a set number of Districts,
a senior Ranger is assigned to administer each of them, and one
or more junior Rangers are assigned to each District to be “seasoned”
by the more experienced Ranger in charge. Although no particular
organizational scheme is endorsed, several alternatives are discussed.
WENAHA3
Foster, H. D. 1905. Two silvics narratives for
the Wenaha National Forest, Washington. Unpublished typescript report
obtained from the National Archives, College Park, MD; record group
95. [Place of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service]. 6 p.
Abstract: This accession consists of two miscellaneous
silvical narratives: a 3-page document called “Reproduction,”
which was written in August of 1906 and includes a short discussion
about planting; and a 3-page document called “The Forest,”
describing 5 blocks or divisions that the Forest was divided into
for timber management purposes. “The Forest” document
was prepared in 1905.
WENAHA4
Foster, H. D. 1906. Report on the silvics of the
Wenaha Forest Reserve, Washington and Oregon. Unpublished typescript
report obtained from the National Archives, College Park, MD; record
group 95. [Place of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service]. 39 p.
Abstract: This report includes the following
sections: topography; climatic conditions of the region; general
forest conditions; forest types (summit, flat, and canyon types);
yellow pine; lodgepole pine; tamarack; Engelmann spruce; sugar
pine-blue spruce; red fir; lowland white fir (grand fir); white
fir; general silvical notes; and forest enemies. A wide variety
of silvical characteristics are discussed for each of the species
described. Foster provides some interesting insights about forest
ecology, as illustrated with these quotes: “Forest types
conform to the general topography of the country, each topographic
type having a different class of forest which varies in the nature
of the species found on each, and in the condition of the timber
and the forest floor. The forest types may be divided into the
summit type, the flat, and the canyon.” “Occasionally
along the ridges in open spaces groups of aspen are found, and
around springs alder grows. Along streams conttonwood and balm
of Gilead is found with mountain maple, wild cherry, and other
broadleaf species.” “Reproduction after burns is usually
very prolific, the principal species which come in as second growth
being lodgepole pine and tamarack, with a lesser proportion of
white fir, lowland fir, and the spruces. On unburned areas, reproduction
is rather backward, especially in thick stands of timber, but
in blanks reproduction often is rather abundant and of the same
proportion as the surrounding forest.” “The slopes
are thin-soiled and usually not well watered. If it were not for
the forest growth upon them, the soil should soon wash off, exposing
the bare rock. This has happened where the bunch grass has been
overgrazed by sheep, and there are no trees to hold the soil.”
BLUEMTN2
Foster, H. D. 1908. Report on the silvics of the
Blue Mountains (E) National Forest, Oregon. Unpublished typescript
report obtained from the National Archives, College Park, MD; record
group 95. [Place of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service]. 30 p.
Abstract: Discusses the vegetation and general
characteristics of the Blue Mountains (E) National Forest, much
of which was later divided among the Whitman, Umatilla, and Malheur
National Forests. Most of this report is based on a reconnaissance
examination of an area near Sumpter, Oregon and as far west as
Susanville. The following topics are described: topography (including
geology), climate, economic aspects, and forest types (yellow
pine, spruce, lodgepole pine, white fir, and mixed conifer types).
The balance of the report provides descriptions for individual
species, in which the general characteristics, site requirements,
tolerance, reproduction, relationships with other species, and
fire effects are discussed. The following species are described:
yellow (ponderosa) pine, lodgepole pine, tamarack (western larch),
Engelmann spruce, Douglas-fir, white (grand) fir, and other species
(western white pine, juniper, etc.). Species rankings are provided
in a section called “General Silvical Notes,” where
shade tolerance, demands upon soil and moisture, altitudinal range,
and forest enemies are rated. The final page of the report is
a list of the trees found on the Forest; 16 species are shown.
This document includes some interesting insights about early forest
conditions and management activities in the Blue Mountains, as
illustrated with these quotes: “In all sales on this Forest,
care should be exercised in marking the timber not to leave the
cutting area in such condition that a valuable stand be supplanted
by inferior species. White fir, though occasionally used for fuel
when no better species are available, makes poor fuel wood, while
for saw timber it is all but valueless owing to the fact that
nearly all mature trees are badly rotted by a prevalent polyporus,
and the wood season-checks badly. Unless care is taken this species
is prone to supplant such species as yellow pine and tamarack
since it is much more tolerant of shade in early life.”
“The forest floor is open, free from underbrush in any quantity,
so much so that it is possible to ride in almost any direction
through the forest without following trails.” “Ten
or twelve years ago a storm with the typical funnel-shaped cloud
of a cyclone passed through Fox Valley, snapping large pine trees
off eight or ten feed from the ground, uprooting others, and demolishing
buildings in the town of Long Creek. It cut a swathe two miles
wide through the forest. The storm was accompanied by hail-stones
of irregular shape some of which measured 6¾ by 7¼
inches in circumference.”
DEFOLIATOR4
Furniss, R. L.; Buckhorn, W. J.; Wright, K. H. 1948.
The spruce budworm in Oregon and Washington; season of 1948. Unpublished
typescript report obtained from the National Archives, College Park,
MD; record group 95. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Insect Laboratory. 19 p.
Abstract: This is a report about the status
of a widespread spruce budworm outbreak in the Douglas-fir and
balsam (grand) fir stands of Oregon and Washington. The purpose
of this report was to record what is known about the budworm outbreak
and to discuss the control possibilities. The data presented were
based on five years of observations, intensive surveys in 1947
and 1948, and an experimental control project and detailed biological
studies in 1948. Maps and tables are included that show the extent
and intensity of the infestation. The possibilities for control
are also discussed. The report includes the following sections:
introduction; the budworm and its habits; the current outbreak
(history, survey of 1948, situation in the Blue Mountains, situation
in the Oregon Cascades, and situation in other areas); control
considerations; and recommendations. Two tables (intensity of
infestation; ownership of infested areas) and two maps (Blue Mountains
area; Oregon Cascades area) are present at the end of the report,
although map 1, Blue Mountains area, was the only one copied since
both maps were in color and oversized. This report builds on work
initiated in 1947 (see an item in the history archives called
“Defoliator situation in the fir stands of eastern Oregon
and Washington” by W. J. Buckhorn for detailed information
about the 1947 situation) when it was proposed to conduct a large-scale
control experiment on the Heppner Ranger District of the Umatilla
National Forest. That experiment was completed in late June and
early July of 1948 when it was demonstrated that aerial application
of one pound of DDT in one gallon of fuel oil per acre, when properly
timed, provided control at levels ranging up to 95 percent. An
intensive study of the budworm was made throughout the 1948 season
on the Heppner Ranger District and other representative areas
in the Blue Mountains. The habits of the budworm were studied
and records were kept on the degree of parasitism and the incidence
of disease. During August and September of 1948, an intensive
survey of budworm defoliation was made by aerial and ground methods;
the results of that survey are given area by area (the results
are generally summarized by national forest) in this report. As
of this report, the budworm outbreak in the Blue Mountains was
the most extensive in the region, comprising some 1,243,000 acres.
Defoliation was rated as very high on 203,000 acres, and high
on 256,300 additional acres. For the Umatilla NF, the total budworm
infestation increased more than 100% from 1947 (374,000 acres)
to 1948 (807,000 acres). Heavy and very heavy defoliation on the
Umatilla NF comprised 392,000 acres of the total. The heavy and
very heavy defoliation had weakened trees to the point that outbreaks
of Douglas-fir beetle and other bark beetles were expected. The
author concludes by noting that control of the spruce budworm
was not a simple matter. It was difficult to know when, or if,
control was necessary. He also recognized that one treatment may
not be enough since the budworm often had a long infestation cycle,
especially as compared to Douglas-fir tussock moth. The possibility
that repeated treatments may be necessary was one reason that
protected stands had to be of sufficient value to warrant the
cost of more than one treatment.
Galbraith 1971.pdf
Galbraith, William A.; Anderson, E. William. 1971. Grazing
history of the northwest. Journal of Range Management. 24(1): 6-12.
Abstract: The earliest grazing in the northwest,
which probably began around 1700, was by Indian horses. Livestock,
a few head of cattle, were first brought to the northwest by spaniards
in 1789 at Nootka Bay on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Marcus
Whitman brought cattle to the area east of the Cascade Mountains
in 1836. Mass movements of cattle took place from western Oregon
to eastern Oregon during the 1860s. After cattle numbers in eastern
Oregon skyrocketed, sizable exports of livestock to regions east
of the Rocky Mountains occurred in the late 1800s, although these
drives were largely neglected by early writers who chose to popularize
cattle drives from Texas and the southwestern United States.
BLUEMTN6
Gaskill, A. 1903. Blue Mountains Reserve. Unpublished
typescript report obtained from the National Archives, College Park,
MD; record group 95. [Place of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Bureau of Forestry]. 8 p.
Abstract: This early report provides a brief
description of the area being considered for a Blue Mountains
Forest Reserve. A short discussion of the forest vegetation in
each township is included. No introductory remarks or overall
descriptions (topography, soils, etc.) are provided, even though
that was typical for other reports of the same era by this particular
author.
LAGRANDE1
Gaskill, A. [1903]. La Grande Forest Reserve. Unpublished
typescript report obtained from the National Archives, College Park,
MD; record group 95. [Place of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Bureau of Forestry]. 8 p.
Abstract: This short report discusses the following
topics as related to the proposed La Grande Forest Reserve, which
was located in extreme northeastern Oregon and a small portion
of southeastern Washington: location; topography; water; soil;
forests; and culture. Very short descriptions of the vegetation
are provided for each of the 17 townships that were contained
in the area being examined.
WALLOWA3
Gaskill, A. 1903. Wallowa Reserve. Unpublished
typescript report obtained from the National Archives, College Park,
MD; record group 95. [Place of publication unknown]: [U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Bureau of Forestry]. 7 p.
Abstract: This short report includes the following
sections: location; topography; water; soil; forest; culture; and
the Wallowa Reserve (general description of vegetation for groups
of townships).
1 - 2
- 3 - 4 - 5
- 6 - 7
- History Home |
