by Mark Demitroff
Reproduced in the Vernacular Architecture Newsletter courtesy of NJ VAF 2014
The New Jersey Pinelands is a remarkable urban wilderness, a setting so valued it became a UNESCO International Biosphere Reserve in 1988. This vast tract of pine/oak woodland and cedar wetlands is bounded by exurban sprawl from New York City, Philadelphia, and the Jersey Shore, yet it has in many ways remained in a
natural state. The environmental elements preserved within have been long
lauded by scientists[i] but the
cultural ecology has remained much more of a mystery. People adapted to this
droughty, infertile barren land, developing various industries and agricultural
pursuits, evolving a keen sense of place along the way. Archives are replete
with historical, social, and even economic studies, yet few integrate the
physical and manmade landscape of this place.[ii]
Map delineating the full extent of NJ Pine
Barrens according to
vegetation, adapted from McCormick and Andresen (1963).
Reproduced with permission from the New
Jersey Audubon Society.
|
To a casual outsider, this region will appear to be
a monotonous lowland of quartz sand and gravel, the detritus of eons of mountain building
and destruction. Shallow wetlands and watercourses cover a third of the land,
dissecting ancient sediments carried into place over several million years by
countless rivers now long gone. The ground ever so slowly weathered away. Ice age
conditions were fiercely cold and dry; the vegetation sparse. Wind and snowmelt
also etched the land, which wasted into muted badlands. The massive Laurentide
Ice Sheet episodically flirted with the Pinelands border but never reached it. South
Jersey is the only ice-marginal coastal plain in North America. The effects of
global climate change have left a distinctive mark, allowing us to link the
landscape to the region’s cultural and environmental dynamics.[iii]
The first inhabitants were Paleo-Indians who widely
traveled during ephemeral foraging events that were mostly based on hunting. Later aboriginal
cultures (Early to Middle Archaic) were more diverse in their economies,
reusing sites with greater frequency and for longer periods of time during
seasonal rounds. These cultures extensively used cold climate landforms like
dunes, blowouts (closed basins or “spungs”), springs (“blue holes,” “boiling
springs”), and braided paleochannels (“savannahs”) across New Jersey’s Outer
Coastal Plain.[iv] Activity
waned as later pre-contact cultures moved away from Pine Barrens exploitation
and made settlement along the bay and ocean shores to subsist on fish,
shellfish, game, and acorns. There is little evidence of widespread agriculture
here during the Woodland period.[v]
Photo of the ancient Long-a-Coming
Trail that follows an ice age dune
crest. Wind-transported sand provided elevated
fill allowing dry
passage across broad expanse of wetlands.
|
Cold climate landforms were also exploited by
post-contact settlers. Early Europeans used Indian paths that linked together
ice age features in a geographic tapestry of interactions between society and
nature. Trails like the Tuckahoe, the Long-A-Coming, and the Shamong went from water
source to water source, following dune crests to cross wetland depressions.
Intersections were often aligned with the southeast rims of “spungs,” which became important watering holes for
horses, oxen, and cattle. As with aboriginal cultures, Pinelands ponds became focal
points for pioneering camps. Taverns were often sited at these focal points of
historic travel for convenience, which became the loci of early settlement
(plantations, forest stations).[vi]
Several types of rocks are native to southern New Jersey,
and a number of exotic stones and large boulders were scattered across the Pine
Barrens, ether transported by strong currents or by river ice of the ancient
Hudson River during the Miocene:[vii]
Ironstone:
an iron rich sedimentary rock. In southern
New Jersey, ironstone is associated with cementation of sands and gravels at a
water table. It is by far the most important building stone in the Pine Barrens.[viii]
Silcrete: a silica-hardened stone derived from sandy
soil (i.e., a duricrust). This very
hard rock is locally abundant at higher elevations of the Inner Coastal Plain[ix]
and fields of highly weathered silcrete remain scattered across parts of the
Pine Barrens. It was used in the foundations of various early Colonial
structures across South Jersey. It is also known as “cuesta quartzite”, and as
“sarsen stone” in Europe (e.g., Stonehenge).
In America it is known as a “pudding stone” if pebbly.
Cohansey
Quartzite: a
less hard variant of the above sandstone containing seashells within its matrix.
It is abundant in Cumberland and Salem counties. Like silcrete, it was put to
use for tool making by aboriginals.[x]
Ferricrete: an iron oxide-hardened sandstone that
formed in soil. Like silcrete above, ferricrete is a duricrust. It is believed
to have formed under hot semiarid conditions millions of years ago.[xi]
Ferricrete is scarce, but can be seen at PAWS animal refuge in Mt. Laurel
side-by-side with silcrete and ironstone.
Pinelands soils were too poor for traditional farming,
hence early on they were considered “barren” for their inability to bear crops.[xii]
An exception was cattle raising. Sedge and grass provided fodder, which
occurred in abundance in Pinelands wetland savannah. Often associated with
Africa, the word is of native Caribbean origin, used to describe the treeless
marshy plains of the American tropics. Spaniards exploited brackish meadow
(coastal savannah) for cattle production (hence Savannah, GA); here early
settlers used freshwater meadow (inland savannah).[xiii]
Once more common, less than 900 acres of this critical habitat remain in the
Pinelands National Reserve.[xiv]
Early farmers avoided the white sands of the Pine Belt,
an area described by some as a “great sandy desert”. Instead they tilled the
heavier loess enriched (ice age dust) Inner Coastal Plain soils to the west,[xv]
or the organics-rich coastal margins to the south and east that could be banked
for farming.[xvi]
The Pine region was left to forest production. Growing cities like Philadelphia
and New York created great demand for timber products. Swedish, English, and
Dutch sawyers built water-powered mills, and quickly cut available wood up-gradient
along every watershed until all good lumber was exhausted before the
Revolutionary War.[xvii]
Pinelands streams are bordered by very broad floodplains:
braided channel terraces created by snowmelt floods over frozen ground.[xviii]
Atlantic white-cedar proliferated there and was highly coveted for cladding.
For example, white-cedar was unparalleled as a roofing material. White cedar
was relatively cheap and durable. Light in weight, it didn’t require heavy
timbering. It was easily wetted in case of fire, making it flame retardant. In
1749 Swedish botanist Peter Kalm worried that the species would soon be exhausted
due to over-harvesting. After cutting, a
new stand of white cedar required 70 years to become again a harvestable
commodity, creating availability gaps.[xix]
The curious labor-intensive practice of cedar “mining,” extracting trees long buried
in river mud or swamp, began to fill supply shortfalls.[xx]
Pine Barrens soils are composed of wind-blown sheet
and dune sand. Pines and oaks are exquisitely adapted to dry loose acid soils.
Their abundance was quickly put to use for carbon store extraction. Before
fossil fuels, forests were used as coal mines and oil wells. Resin-rich pines
were tapped for naval stores – products like turpentine, tar, and rosin, making
them the early equivalent of oil wells. Pines and oaks were carbonized by
colliers in charcoal pits, yielding the early equivalent of coal mines.[xxi]
Naval stores were indispensable supplies for boat
and shipbuilding. Dozens of boat- and shipyards operated along tidewater rivers
throughout South Jersey. “Tar-kilners” would cut down pines, then let them rot.
Once decayed, workers were able to chop out knots to set in clay-lined dishes along
with extracted roots. These resin-rich tree parts (“fat wood”) were slowly
heated to extract resin through destructive distillation.[xxii]
The resin melted into gutters and collected in 5-gallon barrels, which were
then barged down creeks to boatyards for refinement. Tar kilns were often located
at stream heads along small valleys[xxiii] called “cripples.”
(from the Dutch term “kreupelbos:” thicket or underwood), that grow in small
wetland corridors that are dry valleys under ordinary conditions but carry water when frozen ground conditions
prevail.[xxiv]
Charcoal became paramount with the arrival of iron
furnaces and forges. Traditionally used in iron making, charcoal was the only
available fuel capable of reaching temperatures needed to smelt the native bog
iron (2,000–3,000º F). There were no fewer than 34 forges and furnaces operating
in 19th-century South Jersey, so the demand for this product was high. A
minimum of 20,000 acres of timberland was needed to keep a furnace in blast.[xxv]
Weymouth Furnace (one of the largest) in Atlantic County had nearly 100,000
acres of associated lands dedicated to coal production – most but not all
destined for the furnace.[xxvi]
Pinelands tracts were mostly held by wealthy
outside speculators – many related through marriage.[xxvii]
Weymouth Furnace’s owner, Philadelphia based Stephan Colwell, was an economist
and iron merchant. Hundreds of workers are said to have been in employment
here, yet only about forty who lived in Weymouth village are accounted for in
the furnace records.[xxviii] They
were a large itinerant labor force (lumbermen, colliers, teamsters,
ore-raisers) who closely interacted with the local landscape and remain the
focus of this paper. For a socioeconomic history of the industrial Pinelands
and its hearthmen, bankmen, moulders, blacksmiths, see the work of 20th
century historians of New Jersey industry, Charles S. Boyer[xxix]
and Arthur D. Pierce.[xxx]
An average furnace cleared about a thousand acres
of wood per year. Tree harvests were rotated so that woodcutters could return
every 15 to 20 years to the same parcel for re-harvest.[xxxi]
This meant that worker camps were ephemeral features. In the case of coaling
grounds, accommodations were simple as described in this early account:
“These cabins were of the most
primitive structure imaginable, and contained only room devoid of comfort,
there being no furniture except a rude bunk made of roughly hewn timber and
benches and table of the same rude construction. The wants of these people were
few. When their week’s wages were paid, they went to Millville, Malaga,
Bridgton, whichever town was nearest. They returned with a week’s supply of
cornmeal, whiskey, tobacco and pork.”[xxxii]
The Pinelands term for a little hollow-square charcoal
cabin is a “cubby.”[xxxiii] This
author grew up on a Pinelands farm and heard “cave” used for cellar holes
beneath charcoal cabins. He was told by old-timers that when cutting wood was
exhausted in one place, a new camp was established. The first thing a coaler
would do was dig a square pit or cave. A portable hut was then transported from
the prior pit site and placed upon the freshly excavated cavity. This hole
(12-feet by 12-feet) served two purposes: 1) it acted like a root cellar to
keep provisions cool; and 2) it provided a place of refuge if a wildfire burned
over. Others lived in square-logged cabins.
Bog ore formation is in large part a biological process.
Primitive iron oxidizing bacteria like Thiobacillus
ferrooxidans, Leptothrix ochracea, Crenothrix polyspora, Gallionella ferruginea,
and Siderococcus geminate are
responsible for ore flocculation.[xxxiv] Also
called “meadow ore,” it was mined in savannah habitat (ice age paleochannels)
where there are minimal numbers of tree roots to remove during ore exploitation.[xxxv]
Ore was shipped in from areas outside the Pine Barrens from places as far away as
Delaware, New York, and Connecticut. It was ultimately a shortage of charcoal,
not ore, that many consider the critical factor to cause the demise of south
Jersey’s bog iron industry.[xxxvi]
Phantom bloomeries and forges operated in the Pines
to dodge taxes and tariffs. These were primitive affairs, hidden deep. Because shipyards
needed wood, naval stores, and iron for
their trade, very many were believed to operate bloomeries. Some industrious
settlers went into their backyards and home-brewed iron bits and pieces for
personal consumption. The process was as simple as taking a hollow black gum
stump, lining it with clay, and building a small stone refractory at its base.[xxxvii]
The same biological agents that helped form bog iron
turned water in streams a brownish color, but it was not dirty; rather it was
cleaner than most water. Chemotrophic bacteria (those that obtain energy
through chemical oxidation) catalyze iron and organic material turning waters
dark. The hotter the weather, the darker the streams become. In the winter,
when biological activity ebbs, branches run clear.[xxxviii]
It is speculated that this combined chemical-biological activity purifies the
water to an exceptional degree. Sea captains were keen to collect barrels of
tea-colored water for long voyages, since it never went stale. This “cedar
water,” or “sweetwater,” was collected; it tasted silky, and was almost sweet
in flavor.[xxxix]
In 1854 the Camden and Atlantic Railroad (Camden to
Atlantic City) began service, the first railroad to cross the Pinelands. With
its appearance came major changes to cultural landscape.[xl]
The iron industry was failing, unable to compete with competitors, particularly
in Pennsylvania, who had advanced to fossil coal and mined ores.[xli] Demand for charcoal waned but did not
disappear. Smaller markets for charcoal remained for domestic consumption, gunpowder
production, medical purposes, and for certain processes carried out by the U.S. Mint in
Philadelphia.[xlii] Local
charcoal was highly prized by moonshiners through the 1930s, since it left little
telltale smoke or odor to alert revenuers that a batch of poison was in
distillation.
Coeval with charcoal’s fall in the 1850s came the
rise in demand for cordwood. Early steam boilers ran on cordwood, causing a sudden
jump in the value of pine land. Carloads of fuel wood were shipped out by way
of rail by locomotives powered by the very same fuel. Huge tracts of land were
deforested, which prepared the ground for the next phase of Pinelands
exploitation – the burgeoning of agricultural land schemes.[xliii]
Without furnaces and forges, large tracts of land were no longer needed for
charcoal production. Outside owners now speculated in land development schemes.[xliv]
Railroads made it easy to bring in guano or marl to
amend otherwise poor soils. New Jersey marl was not actually a fertilizer but
rather a soil conditioner mined in Inner Coastal Plain locations bearing its
name, like Marlboro and Marlton.[xlv] Applied in
tons per acre, its claylike pellets acted like a sponge to hold nutrients and moisture
in sandy sediments.[xlvi] Railroads
likewise provided quick transport of farm commodities to urban markets, an
important consideration in the days before artificial refrigeration.
Land promoters met with some difficulty in selling farm
plots in coastal New Jersey at time of US westward expansion with prime
agricultural land available at little to no cost.[xlvii]
Their hook was to promote planned centers of place surrounded by supporting
agricultural lands. Buy a twenty-acre farm in the agricultural lands and your
family was given a building lot in town. It was an agrarian utopia; “come
earnest homeseekers,” be your own
boss, and live amongst health-giving pines.” Big cities were only an hour away
by modern rolling stock.[xlviii]
While these land schemes were at first pitched to
people from England and New England, ultimately more favor was found in
advancing these settlements along ethnic lines to the throngs of new
immigrants. A curious settlement pattern developed in response to Pinelands topography,
which Libby Marsh dubbed the “ethnic archipelago.”[xlix]
Discrete topographic rises, surrounded by wetlands, became islands of
colonization for Germans, Italians, Jews, and other ethnic groups (Welsh,
Russian, Ukrainian, Cossack, Kalmyk, Gypsy). In essence they were like city
neighborhoods, only pastoral.[l]
First to seek opportunity here were the Germans, beginning
at the time of the 1848 Revolution. At the time, Berlin was at the apex of the
industrial revolution, so emigrants from Germany were often highly valued
workers in this state.[li] The Richards
family, who largely controlled the local furnace empire, was sympathetic to
these newcomers. The earliest immigrant German settlers were predominantly
Prussian,[lii]
a region within Europe’s great sand belt associated with the Fennoscandian Ice
Sheet.[liii]
Their homeland shared the Pinelands ice marginal landscape heritage, and they
brought with them skill-sets that enabled them to farm sandy terrain.
The next newcomers were the Italians. Their arrival
is a story of climate change and war economics. Vineland’s success was in part due to
high value farm commodities during the Civil War. Before 1861 the local
population was estimated to be about 50, but it swelled to 5,500 by 1865. When
the War ended the price for farm goods plummeted as production recovered in
other areas. Local farmers started to abandon their lands. Vineland’s founder
Charles K. Landis constructed a new railroad line in hopes of economic stimulation.[liv]
The “Coolie” labor of the time were northern Italians, who emigrated after a
series of social disruptions starting with a potato blight and culminating with
massive floods wiping out whole villages back home.[lv]
They saw great potential in the exodus of “Yankee” farmers from Vineland.
Italians ate little meat, and intensively cultivated fruits and vegetables. A
farm lot that once supported a single family under Northern European practices
could now support three or four families with Southern European practices.[lvi]
Another interesting component of the ethnic archipelago
involved Eastern European Jews. Before the modern state of Israel was born, to many
of the Jewish faith the New Jersey Pine Barrens was to become the Promised
Land. By the spring of 1883, two years after Tsar Alexander II was assassinated
in Imperial Russia, the agricultural colonies of Alliance and Burbridge Village
were founded for the benefit of pogrom refugees.[lvii]
There were twice as many Jewish settlements in New Jersey within than outside
the Pines (seventeen vs. eight respectively).[lviii]
Pinelands colonies were started as extensions to the
New York and Philadelphia rag or “shmatte”
trade. Villages were strung along newly erected railroad lines crossing the
wilds of Cape May, Atlantic, Cumberland and Gloucester Counties. These were
driven by railroad-related land speculation. For the colonists’ added benefit
rug mills, button factories, and clothing shops were erected to supplement
anticipated income from agricultural-land pursuits.[lix]
They spoke Russian and Yiddish. Through their knowledge of Russian soil science
and German geology, they were convinced they too could make the Pine Barrens desert-like
landscape bloom. Adherents went on to make great contributions in soil science,
microbiology, and poultry husbandry.[lx]
An early promotional brochure touted the Pinelands
as being “particularly well adapted for the business of poultry raising, to
which in recent years a great deal of attention is being given in this part of
the State, and with very profitable results.”[lxi]
By the mid-20th century, South Jersey became the egg capital of the world.
Several factors account for the
industry’s local dominance.[lxii] First,
the sandy and nutrient-poor soils were less likely to harbor poultry diseases
that cause problems in heavier soils across the State. Second, railroad-era
lots were smaller parcels, better suited to intensive agricultural practices
like poultry farming. Third, chickens provided a valuable year-round domestic
food source during intermittent economic lean periods commonplace in the Pine Barrens.[lxiii]
By the 1970s, the entire industry moved to the Delmarva Peninsula and beyond.
With the appearance of modern antibiotics, chickens no longer required range
land, but now could now be caged. Down South, producers benefited from lower
heating costs, cheaper grain, and an infusion of modern infrastructure. Hardly
a chicken farm is left in the Pine Barrens, although coops, mills, and other
architectural relics of the industry abound in various states of repair.
The Pine Barrens even has its own terroir, a special
combination of ground characteristics, climate, and cultural techniques.[lxiv]
Soils can be very old, possessing memory of rigorous freezing and thawing.
Silicates like quartz and feldspar share distinctive characteristics with those
found in Northern Russia today.[lxv] It is
suggested that this unusual ice age inheritance imparts special qualities to
the local ground that provides a distinct sense of place to some of the
region’s agricultural products like its delicious Outer Coastal Plain Vineyard
Association wine and famed “Jersey” tomatoes. Cranberries and blueberries are
exquisitely adapted to the acid sands of local wetlands and lowlands.
Vineyards, once commonplace until Prohibition, are returning, to good accolades
as a sustainable crop for the uplands. The excellent quality and quantity of
produce raised in South Jersey is impressive, including specialties like
eggplant and dandelion.[lxvi] The
Vineland Produce Auction is the premier auction block on the East Coast, supplying
produce to wholesalers from April to December.
Development pressures are extreme in New Jersey.
Valued landscapes usually go to the highest bidder, and the fate of our
cultural heritage is all too often decided by economic rather than preservation
concerns. Our traditional ways and the structures that commemorated them are
quickly fading away. Problems compound as the Pinelands Commission’s planning
power decentralizes and shifts to facilitate local entrepreneurial interests.[lxvii]
The Comprehensive Management Plan, the ruling document for the Pinelands National
Reserve, contains robust language about cultural protection, but its protections
are often waived. There is less and less enforcement of Pinelands cultural
rules and few ways to punish those who choose to violate them. Currently the
Commission’s heritage specialist, a Cultural Resource Planner, is budgeted to
work one-half day per week to protect the cultural legacy of this 1.1 million acre
biosphere with a permanent population of 700,000 residents. If current trends
continue, we will lose much of the cultural landscape that has made this place
special.
[i] Forman, R.T.T. (ed.), 1979: Pine Barrens: Ecosystem
and Landscape. New York: Academic Press. 601 pp.
[ii] Bassett, T.J., and Zimmerer, K.S., 2003: Cultural
ecology. In Gaile, G.L., and Willmott, C.J. (eds.). Geography in
America at the Dawn of the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
pp. 97–112.
[iii]
Demitroff, M., 2007: Pine Barrens
Wetlands: Geographical Reflections of South Jersey’s Periglacial Legacy. MS
thesis, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 244 pp; French, H.M., and
Demitroff, M., 2001: Cold-climate origin of the enclosed depressions and
wetlands ('spungs') of the Pine
Barrens, southern New Jersey, USA. Permafrost
and Periglacial Processes. 12: 337–350; and French, H.M., Demitroff, M.,
Forman, S.L., and Newell, W.L., 2007: A Chronology of Late-Pleistocene
permafrost events in southern New Jersey, eastern USA. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes. 18: 49–59.
[iv]
Demitroff, 2007, op. cit.; and
Cresson, J.A., Mounier, A., Bonfiglio, A., and Demitroff, M., 2006: Periglacial
landforms of southern New Jersey: sites, trails and ancient cultural links. In Hellström, R., and Frankenstein, S.
(eds.). Program and Abstracts, 63rd
Eastern Snow Conference, University of Delaware, Held Jointly with the
Cryosphere Specialty Group of the Association of American Geographers, 7–9 June
2006, p. 72.
[v]
Bierbrauer, S.H., Regensberg, R., and Hartwick, C., 2014: New data on Late
Woodland faunal remains and diet at an estuarine site, Kimble’s Beach, Cape May
County, NJ. Session 11: Prehistory in the
Lower Delaware Valley: New Investigations
and Interpretations. 44st Annual Middle Atlantic Archaeological
Conference, March 13–17, 2011, Sheraton Bucks County Hotel, Langhorne, PA.
[vi] Demitroff, 2007, op. cit.;
and Demitroff, M,, and Nelson, F.E., 2009: The periglacial legacy of the New
Jersey Pine Barrens, USA: climate history and geomorphic heritage as a land-use
management tool. (Abstract & Poster). Tough
Choices – Land Use Under a Changing Climate, Report on the German-US
Conference. Berlin, October 2nd and 3rd 2008 and
Opportunities for Joint German-US Research Activities in the Field of Land-Use
and on Global Change. Kiel, GER: German National Committee on Global Change
Research (NKGCF), p. 18.
[vii] Newell, W.L., Powars, D.S., Owens, J.P., Stanford, S.D., and Stone,
B.D., 2000: Surficial Geologic Map of
Central and Southern New Jersey. United States Geological Survey,
Miscellaneous Investigations Series, Map 1–2540–D, Washington, DC; and French,
H.M., and Demitroff, M., 2003: Late-Pleistocene periglacial phenomena in the
Pine Barrens of southern New Jersey: GANJ Field Excursion Guide, October 11,
2003. In Hozik, M.J., and Mihalasky,
M.J. (eds.). Field Guide and Proceedings,
20th Annual Meeting of the Geological Association of New Jersey,
October 10–11, 2003. Trenton, NJ: Geological Society of New Jersey, pp.
117–142.
[viii] Lewis,
J.V., 1909: Building stones of New Jersey. Annual
Report of the State Geologist for the Year 1908: Report on Forests. Trenton, NJ: MacCrellish & Quigley.
pp. 53–124.
[ix] Mounier, R.A., 2008. The
Aboriginal Exploitation of Cuesta Quartzite in Southern New Jersey. PhD
dissertation, Memorial University, St. John’s, NFL., 435 pp; and Wyckoff, J.S.,
and Newell, W.L., 1992: Silcrete near Woodstown, New Jersey. In Gohn, G.S., (ed.), Proceedings of the 1988 U.S. Geological
Survey Workshop on the Geology and Geohydrology of the Atlantic Coastal Plain.
United States Geological Survey, Circular 1059, Washington, DC, pp. 39–51.
[x] Friedman
M. 1954. Miocene orthoquartzite from New Jersey. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology. 24, 4: 235–241.
[xi] Goudie,
A., 1973: Duricrusts in Tropical and
Subtropical Landscapes. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. 174 pp.
[xii] Tedrow,
J.C.F., 1986: Soils of New Jersey.
Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger. 480 pp.
[xiii]
Demitroff, 2007, op. cit.
[xiv] Smith,
D.C., 2012: Succession Dynamics of Pine
Barrens Riverside Savannas: A Landscape-Survey Approach. MS thesis, Rutgers
University, New Brunswick, NJ, 69 pp.
[xv] Newell, et.al., 2000, op. cit.
[xvi] Sebold,
K.R., 1992: From Marsh to Farm: the
Landscape Transformation of Coastal New Jersey. National Park Service:
Washington, DC. 95 pp.
[xvii] Harshberger, J.W., 1916: The
Vegetation of the New Jersey Pine Barrens: An Ecological Investigation.
Philadelphia, PA: Christopher Sower. 329 pp; and Wacker, P.O., 1979: Human
exploitation of the New Jersey Pine Barrens before 1900. In Forman, R.T.T. (ed.), Pine
Barrens: Ecosystem and Landscape. New York: Academic Press. pp. 3–23.
[xviii] Demitroff, 2007, op. cit.; and
French, H.M., and Demitroff, M., 2012: Late-Pleistocene paleohydrology, eolian
activity and frozen ground, New Jersey Pine Barrens, eastern USA. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences. 91,
1/2: 25–35.
[xix] Wilson, H.F., 1953: The Jersey
Shore: A Social and Economic History of the Counties of Atlantic, Cape May,
Monmouth and Ocean (2 vols.). New
York: Lewis Historical Publishing Co. 1055 pp. A third but separate volume
contains family and personal history. See also Little, S. Jr., 1950: Ecology and Silviculture of Whitecedar and
Associated Hardwoods in Southern New Jersey. Bulletin No, 56, School of
Forestry, Yale University, New
Haven, CT. 103 pp.
[xx] Weiss,
H.B., and Weiss, G.M., 1965: Some Early
Industries of New Jersey. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Agricultural Society. 70
pp.
[xxi] Harshberger, 1916, op cit.;
and Weiss, and Weiss, 1965, op. cit.
[xxii] Harshberger, 1916, op. cit.;
and Weiss, and Weiss, 1965, op. cit.
[xxiii] Sim,
R.J., and Weiss, H.B., 1955: Charcoal-Burning
in New Jersey from Early Times to the Present. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey
Agricultural Society. 62 pp.
[xxiv]
Demitroff, 2007, op. cit.
[xxv] Braddock-Rogers, K., 1930: The bog ore industry in South Jersey prior
to 1845. Journal of Chemical Education. 7, 7: 1493–1519; Moore, H., 1943: An Old Jersey Furnace: A Study. Baltimore,
MD: Newth-Morris Publishing, 15 pp; and Starkey, J., 1962: The bog ore and bog
iron industry of South Jersey. The
Bulletin New Jersey Academy of Science 7, 1: 5–8.
[xxvi] Johnson,
R.F., 2001: Weymouth New Jersey: A
History of the Furnace, Forge, and Paper Mills. Kearney, NE: Morris
Publishing. 137 pp.
[xxvii] Wilson, 1953, op cit.; and
Jones, C.W., c.1888: Richland New Jersey:
20,000 Acres of Farming Land, also Farm Lots. Richland, NJ: Richland
Improvement Co. 16 pp.
[xxviii] Johnson,
2001, op. cit.
[xxix] Boyer,
C.S., 1931: Early Forges & Furnaces in New Jersey. Philadelphia: University
of Pennsylvania Press. 287 pp.
[xxx] Pierce,
A.D., 1957: Iron in the Pines: The Story
of New Jersey’s Ghost Towns and Bog Iron. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press. 244 pp.
[xxxi] Starkey,
1962, op. cit.
[xxxii]
Hutchings, M.C., 1907: Historical sketches of Buena, by the editor, Chapter IV.
Valley Ventura, October 5.
[xxxiii] Lee,
F.B., 1896: Jerseyisms. Dialect Notes.
1: 327–337.
[xxxiv] Means,
J.L., Yuretich, R.F., Crerar, D.A., Kinsman, D.J.J, and Borcsik, M.P., 1981: Hydrogeochemistry of the New Jersey Pine
Barrens. Bulletin 76, New Jersey Geological Survey. 107 pp.
[xxxv]
Demitroff, 2007, op. cit.
[xxxvi] Braddock-Rogers, 1930, op cit.;
and Starkey, 1962, op. cit.
[xxxvii]
Braddock-Rogers, 1930, op. cit.
[xxxviii] Means, et al., 1981, op. cit.
[xxxix]
Harshberger, 1916, op. cit.
[xl] Wilson,
1953, op. cit.
[xli] Starkey,
1962, op. cit.
[xlii] Wilson, 1953, op. cit.; and
Sim, and Weiss, 1955, op. cit.
[xliii] Wilson,
1953, op. cit.
[xliv] Hauck,
J.F., and Lee, A.T.M., 1942: Land
subdivision in the New Jersey Pines. Bulletin 701, New Jersey Agricultural
Experiment Station, New Brunswick, NJ, 52 pp.
[xlv] Wilson,
1953, op. cit.
[xlvi] Tedrow,
J.C.F., 2002: Greensand and Greensand
Soils of New Jersey: A Review. E279, Department of Ecology, Evolution and
Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, 39 pp.
[xlvii] Judd, O.
(publisher), 1865: A novel enterprise. American
Agriculturalist for the Farm, Garden, and Household. 24, 4: 128–129.
[xlviii] Wilson, 1953, op. cit.; and
Jones, c.1888, op. cit.
[xlix] Marsh,
E., 1979: The southern Pine Barrens: an ethnic archipelago. In Sinton, J.W.,
(ed.). Natural and Cultural Resources of
the New Jersey Pine Barrens: Inputs and Research Needs for Planning.
Proceedings and Papers of the First Research Conference on the New Jersey Pine
Barrens, Atlantic City, N.J., May 22–23, 1978. Pomona, NJ: Stockton State
College. pp. 192–198.
[l] Berger, J., and Sinton, J.W., 1985: Water,
Earth, and Fire: Land Use and Environmental Planning in the New Jersey Pine
Barrens. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 228 pp;
Hufford, M., 1986. One Space, Many
Places: Folklife and Land Use in New Jersey’s Pinelands National Reserve.
Washington, DC: American Folklife Center, 144 pp; and Moonsammy, R.Z., Cohen,
D.S., and Williams, L.E., (eds.), 1987: Pinelands
Folklife. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 234 pp.
[li] Cunz, D., 1956: Egg Harbor City: New Germany in New Jersey. Report of the Society of the Germans in
Maryland. 29: 9–30; and Eckhardt, G.M., 1973: The History of Folsom, New Jersey: 1845–1976. Bicentennial Edition.
Egg Harbor City, NJ: Laureate Press. 121 pp.
[lii] Maxwell,
M.W., 1998: U.S. Census Records of Egg
Harbor City, New Jersey. The Roundhouse Museum, Egg Harbor City Historical
Society, Egg Harbor City, NJ, 14 pp.
[liii] Koster,
E.A., 2009: The “European Aeolian Sand Belt”: geoconservation of drift sand
landscapes. Geoheritage. 1: 93–110.
[liv] Warner, A.G., 1869: Sketches,
Incidents and History: Vineland and the Vinelanders. Vineland, NJ: Crocker
Steam Job Printer (reprinted in The
Vineland Historical Magazine, 57, 1: 18–71); and Ladd, B.F., 1881: History of Vineland: Its Soil, Products,
Industries, and Commercial Interests. Vineland, NJ: Evening Journal Book and Job Printing
Establishment. 84 pp. (reprinted in The
Vineland Historical Magazine. 51, 1&2: 1–64.
[lv]
Bolognani, B., 1984: A Courageous People
from the Dolomites: the Immigrants from Trentino on U.S.A. Trails. 3rd
edition and Patronage of the Autonomous Province of Trent, Italy. Trent, IT:
TEMI. 504 pp.
[lvi]
Dillingham (Mr.), 1911: Immigrants in
Industries (in Twenty-Five Parts), Part 24: Recent Immigrants in Agriculture
(in Two Volumes: Vol. I). Document No. 633, Reports of the Immigration
Commission, Washington, DC, 580 pp.
[lvii] Wilson, 1953, op. cit.; and
Brandes, J., 1971: Immigrants to Freedom:
Jewish Communities in Rural New Jersey Since 1882. Philadelphia, PA: The
Jewish Publication Society of America. 424 pp.
[lviii] Meyers,
A., 1990: Southern New Jersey Synagogues:
A Social History Highlighted by Stories of Jewish Life from the 1880’s - 1980’s.
Sewell, NJ: Sir Speedy Printers. 338 pp.
[lix] Meyers, 1990, op. cit.; and
Eisenberg, E., 1995: Jewish Agricultural
Colonies in New Jersey, 1882–1920. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
218 pp.
[lx] Trustees of Rutgers College in New Jersey, 1952: Lipman Hall: Being an Account of the Proceedings at the Dedication on
June 12th, 1951, at a Building Named in Honor of Jacob Goodale
Lipman. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station. Binghamton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press, 107 pp.; and Goldhaft, A.D.,
1957: The Golden Egg. New York:
Horizon Press, 314 pp.
[lxi] Jones,
c.1888, op. cit.
[lxii] Wilson, 1953, op. cit.; and
Wegner, H.G., 2002: Memories of South Jersey’s great poultry and egg industry.
Leaflet from the Vineland Founder’s Day Celebration. 1 pp.
[lxiii]
Goldhaft, 1957, op. cit.
[lxiv] Coia,
L., 2010: East Coast AVA established. News
Archive, Wine Business. http://www.winebusiness.com/news/?go=getArticle&dataid=80970.
Accessed March 12, 2014.
[lxv] Demitroff, M., Rogov, V.V., French, H.M., Konishchev, V.N.,
Streletskiy, D.A., Lebedeva-Verba, M.D., and Alekseeva, V.A., 2007: Possible evidence for episodes of Late-Pleistocene cryogenic weathering,
southern New Jersey, eastern USA. In Russian Academy of Sciences. Proceedings, Vol II:
Cryogenic Resources of Polar Regions, Salekhard City, Polar Cycle, West
Siberia, June 2007. pp. 139–141. Also French, H.M., Demitroff, M.,
Streletskiy, D., Forman, S.L., Gozdzik, J., Konishchev, V.N., Rogov, V.V., and
Lebedeva-Verba, M.P., 2009: Evidence for Late-Pleistocene permafrost in the
Pine Barrens, southern New Jersey. Earth’s
Cryosphere. 2009, 3: 17–28 (in Russian) .
[lxvi] Fiorelli, P.R., 1977: Dandelion
Recipe Book: Vineland is the Dandelion Capital of the World. Vineland, NJ:
The Mayor’s Special Events Office, 10 pp; and Fiorelli, P.R., 1979: Vineland, New Jersey’s World Famous Eggplant
Recipe Book. Vineland, NJ: The Mayor’s Special Events Office. 14 pp.
[lxvii] Mason,
R.J., 1992: Contested Lands: Conflict and
Compromise in New Jersey’s Pine Barrens. Conflicts in Urban and Regional
Development series, volume 6. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. 257
pp.