The late afternoon light was stunning at the Pond today. Clear, golden sun spiked through chinks in the steely blue clouds and cast sharp shadows on the water. The wind was high, gusting probably to 10 mph. It was not cold, only about 50 degrees Fahrenheit, but the wind and the light gave it foreboding air, as if though the prefigured winter was just behind Stone Hill and would arrive anyday. I parked my car in the usual spot and got out to survey my site for signs of former land use and the impact that human hands have had on the natural features.
Based on the surrounding terrain and its current use, my first inclination is that the terra firma on my site was at one time pastureland. The cattle grazing fields on Stone Hill are my firmest evidence, especially since they’re currently in use for that very purpose. The cow fence that runs around the entirety of the meadow, sections the area off as in a pasture, but the fence, lacking livestock to pen in, seems to be only for ornamental purposes and to divide the Wall’s Pond property from the backyards of South Street. The vicinity of the pond is obviously still maintained by human hands; the mower stripes that rim the pond and the presence of picnic tables and the bench under the red maple are clear enough indicators that the Pond is now a recreation site that is kept neat and not an abandoned pasture. Vegetation succession, the subject of next week’s blog will delve more deeply into the question of the former land use, but for now, I’ll stick to the effects of human actions on the land.
Aerial photographs from 1935 show the pond to be exactly where it is today, and to be roughly the same size as it is now. The stand of white pines along the south edge is gone, but the sugar maples at the entrance show up, as does a large tree in the vicinity of the current-day red maple. Meadows to the north and west of the pond look as open and uncultivated as they do today. The line of trees down the western fence is absent from the 1935 photo, but some sort of line is certainly there dividing Wall’s Pond from the field to the west that is now the parking lot. There appears to be a very slight color change between the Wall’s Pond field and the parking lot field, perhaps indicating the difference between a pasture area and a cultivated area, but the map alone is not strong enough evidence upon which to make a ruling. Next week, when I examine vegetation succession of the site, I can gain divine just what that field was once used for. Regardless, the field had a very clear path running through it in 1935.
The 1952 aerial photograph also shows a path or road running through the parking lot field as well as the first beginnings of construction on the Clark that was indeed started that year. The massive white pines that I see today are in neither picture but the hemlock stand to the southeast is present in both. Both pictures also show a tree where there is now only a finger of marshy border vegetation at the northeast corner of the pond. The pond itself seems unchanged from the Wall’s Pond of the early and mid-20th century, which suggests that the pond was not created as an ornamental feature for the Clark, which was one of my original hypotheses about its origin. The pond obviously predates the museum. I remember Professor Art mentioning in lecture that Wall’s Pond is a man-made pond, which stands to reason considering its placement among pastures. The practical utility of having a consistent water supply for cattle supports the creation of a pond near a pasture, and Christmas Brook, while it does not visibly connect to Wall’s Pond, flows past it and could, at some point, have supplied water to it. Regardless, the Pond has been around for at least 74 years, perhaps much longer. The Coffin Map showed no water where Wall’s Pond is now so perhaps the Pond was created by human hands in the 19th century. An investigation of tree succession will tell more.