Number 1 Camp Steam Boiler (Watson's East Triangle)

[Huezee]

Does anyone have any information if the old steam boiler or any of the buildings still exist?

From the DEC:

The entire management unit has a long history of lumbering. At the site of the Old Number 1 Camp are the remains of a sawmill and associated buildings. There is also an old steam boiler which was used to power the sawmill. The boiler, which weighed nearly 16 tons, was brought to the area by T.B. Basselin, a prominent early lumberman. As the timber supply within one area became depleted the boiler was relocated and another mill constructed. A wooden dam exists on the West Branch of the Oswegatchie River creating Mud Pond.

(emphasis added)

[Wldrns]

Yeah, the boiler and small local pond dam are still there. No buildings left standing.I have some photos somewhere from about 5 years ago. I'll try to find them later today.

[Huezee]

Awesome!

[Huezee]

No joy on the photos?

[Wldrns]

Found them!

[Huezee]

Very cool. Thank you! God, I'm such a geek.

[Northcountryman]

Interesting, and where is this located? Never heard of it before

[Wldrns]

Originally Posted by Northcountryman

Interesting, and where is this located? Never heard of it before

https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/80005.html

It's one of my favorite remote areas to explore by bushwack using only map and compass.

[Northcountryman]

oh ok, Western slope--got it.

[Wldrns]

Originally Posted by Northcountryman

oh ok, Western slope--got it.

Not many slopes of much significance in the area. Which makes it most interesting to navigate by compass and visual terrain observation.

[MTVhike]

Is this an historic object to be preserved or trash to be removed?

[montcalm]

Originally Posted by MTVhike

Is this an historic object to be preserved or trash to be removed?

Depends on your perspective.

If you hold companies to the same standard that you do an individual... they carried it in, they can carry it out.

[Wldrns]

Just try to hold any originial company to that standard now. I've heard it unofficially said that, if you come across artifacts that are 50 or more years old, then they are to be preserved as historically valuable. Newer stuff is trash to be removed.There are tons and tons of those old dumps and abandoned machinery out there from logging years long past.

[montcalm]

Oh for sure - who knows if they are still in business. They "should have" been held responsible.

That chunk of iron is probably not hurting much though. Other "junk" left, not-so-much (not really much of an issue in the ADKs though, thankfully).

[montcalm]

I wonder if the 50 years has anything to do with APA formation and when this kind of thing would have started to be regulated.

[DSettahr]

The so called "50 year rule" has nothing to do with the APA.

Rather, 50 years is the general rule that has often been applied across the board throughout the US with regards to whether something is an "historic artifact" and is worthy of preservation efforts and/or protection. While the specific language of laws regarding protection of historic artifacts varies from one jurisdiction to the next, 50 years has often been the norm with regards to defining what constitutes an artifact for the purposes of the law or regulation- that number shows up quite frequently in laws/regulations on the subject from one state to the next, and also at the federal level.

I'm not entirely sure where the idea originated that "50 years" was the appropriate time limit, but some googling lead me to a source that indicates that it first showed up in a 1952 amendment to the federal Historic Sites Act of 1935.

There's been some discussion recently that it may be time to rethink 50 years as an appropriate limit for what makes something historic. At present, we're looking at items from the early 70s coming up on "historic" status and gaining legal protections. There's a whole lot of trash (discarded beer cans) out there in the ADK backcountry that is about to gain legal protections, if it hasn't already. And the age of disposable plastics gaining the same isn't far off.

[montcalm]

Rather a moving target.

I can see why archeologists would want to be conservative and not have people mess with “artifacts”. But there’s definitely some grey area as to when enough is enough. I bet there’s a couple canoes out there coming up on the 50 year mark as well.

[DSettahr]

To be fair, it's also not easy to come up with wording for a legal document that allows for interpretation on what constitutes something as "historic" or not based on human emotion. Age of an object is much more objective and not as subject to interpretation if and when it becomes necessary for these matters to be examined in court.

[montcalm]

I don't think we'll have to do much worry about anyone removing that boiler anytime soon. And NY probably has tax records for all those lands from the logging era.

I'd be much more concerned about older artifacts from early explorers or natives.

Hopefully the ones like the boiler serve as a reminder as how not to manage the forests; until they turn into dust. I'd guess it would take a good long time for that one to break down to small iron oxide fragments.