The Southern Highlander Blog
This is a great group of scholars interested in the history of the southern mountain region. This year, we will be meeting at Pack Memorial Auditorium in Asheville. I will be moderating a panel on “Expressions of Land in 20th Century Appalachia.” I hope to see you there. Below find links to the program, along with a place to register.
https://www.etsu.edu/cas/sahconference/annual_meeting/conference_information.php
Ginseng Diggers won two awards in the past month, the James A. Duke Excellence in Botanical Literature award, given annually by the American Botanical Council, and the Appalachian Studies’ Weatherford Award for Nonfiction. I couldn’t be more honored. To have my book listed alongside the other Duke and Weatherford winners is something that I will always cherish. I’d like to thank my wonderful family for their unwavering support. I’d like to thank Richard Starnes, my advisor at WCU who first validated my research interests, and my PhD advisor at UGA, John Inscoe, without whom I would have never come close to finishing this book. And, of course, I’d like to thank the good folks at the University Press of Kentucky, specifically Patrick O’Dowd, for their support and encouragement through this process. They put out one hell of a good-looking book.
I’d like to highlight some of the thoughtful and kind words by the Weatherford Award judges, all of which are very excellent Appalachian scholars.
Katherine Newfont: This is a remarkable--even transformational--work of Appalachian history. Through painstaking research in 19th-century records Manget reveals a world we had previously barely glimpsed, one that tied thousands of Appalachian people to global markets while also enabling them to maintain significant control over the terms of their own labor. Appalachian communities' ties to forests--both culturally and economically--predate extractive industry and are now re-emerging as coal and other industries increasingly abandon the region. At this pivotal moment Manget offers a brilliant exploration of ginseng, a forest product long used to sustain Appalachian livelihoods. This is a "usable past" indeed. This study could hardly be more impressive or more timely for the region.
Loyal Jones Appalachian Center: Ginseng Diggers: A History of Root and Herb Gathering in Appalachia opens a new way to think about Appalachian harvesting habits. It begins to illustrate how the interconnection between East Asian markets and Appalachian medicinal remedies influences the perception of Appalachia while intimately addressing topics on gender roles, class relations, forest use, and commons management. Manget introduces ginseng’s history in Appalachian culture by allowing for the staple root to showcase interdisciplinary impacts on the world while remaining focused to its origins, Appalachia, and how the root influences Appalachian culture today. He manages to incorporate original ideas about interdisciplinary understanding with a simple root that is at its core is ideas about interdisciplinary understanding with a simple root that is at its core is Appalachian which brings Appalachia to the center stage of global interconnection. It’s written so well that you’d think this unmatched understanding of Ginseng was simple knowledge, but it’s the first of its kind. It’s relevant, original, globally thinking, and it’s simply Appalachian.
Jeffery Keith: A model of the kind of Appalachian history the world needs now, Luke Manget's Ginseng Diggers uses seemingly lifeless documents, such as business ledgers, to resurrect a practice and a way of life that, as he points out, is best understood as dynamic. By contextualizing the work of diggers within local, regional, national, and global historical trends, Magnet shows how plant collectors participated in what Anna Tsing calls "salvage capitalism," while he deconstructs mischaracterizations of these important but mostly unsung actors in Appalachian history. By building up a better understanding of how various individuals made use of the commons, Ginseng Diggers illustrates how mountain people played a central role in the development of botanical medicine--a story that extends far beyond the mountains and one that continues to have an impact on contemporary Appalachia.
Dykeman Stokely: Luke Manget puts a new focus on Appalachian and American history through the lens of "commons commodities" (herbs and plants that through customary use belong to the gatherers and not to the landowners). He shows how these herbs, bolstered by early America's Jacksonian democracy and religious individualism, helped revolutionize American medicine. Furthermore, he describes how these "commodities" enabled the formation of supply chains from the gatherers all the way to the metropolis and beyond and permitted the region to survive and contribute to the war efforts in the Civil War and World War I. Manget looks particularly at ginseng whose final destination was China but whose great monetary value helped the gatherers to somewhat overcome the circumscription of the commons by state laws and the physical destruction of the commons set in motion by the coming of the railroad and extractive industries. But ginseng's symbolic value as a symbol of the wilderness was also large, and although the figure of the "sang digger" appeared in the late 19th century popular press in the shadow of the hillbilly stereotype, even in some local color novels these figures, though subordinate to characters representing technological progress, served as a counterbalance to the overcivilized American psyche. This renegotiation of gender (and the varied gender roles over time relating to ginseng as described throughout the book), is supplemented by the author in his epilogue by a renegotiation of class, specifically the labor class, which he feels the economy of "commons commodities" can serve as a model for, believing that the commons can be preserved without being exhausted through self-interest and discounting efficiency as a sole model.
The people with Appalachian Beginning Forest Farmer Coalition are doing great work, and I wanted to get their information up here. You can visit their website at https://www.appalachianforestfarmers.org/. I’d also like to plug their webinar series, which offers some great tips and interviews with forest farmers on how to grow everything from ginseng to mushrooms. There are ways to both profit from this kind of agriculture and improve the health of the forest and broader mountain ecosystem, and this organization is helping to make that happen. Although the webinar series is over, you can still access the recordings here: https://www.appalachianforestfarmers.org/forestfocus?fbclid=IwAR3czJr46RKGqldgirQXYpc07Fzfe2K2BMMSUB-vI8kfPfd9mq62AspHRmo
If you are in the Knoxville area at 5pm on Saturday, May 14, come on down to the Mast General Store to hear me talk about my book. Be sure to RSVP with Union Ave Books (info below). On May 15 at 3pm, I will be giving a book talk at Timber!, a farm-to-table restaurant in Johnson City.
You can find a link to my webinar on ginseng with the American Botanical Council’s Sustainable Herbs Program here.
Ginseng Diggers
A History of Root and Herb Gathering in Appalachia
I will be participating in two conversations about root digging in Appalachia over the next two days. Here are the links:
Wednesday, March 23, 2022, 6-7pm at Malaprops Bookstore in Asheville, NC [Virtual]. I’ll be chatting with Dan Pierce, historian at UNC-Asheville. Register HERE.
Thursday, March 24, 2022, 2-3pm. The Ethnobotany Webinar Series (Register HERE) with Ann Armbrecht of the American Botanical Council. Ann is the author of the fascinating book, The Business of Botanicals: Exploring the Healing Promise of Plant Medicines in a Global Industry.
View from Sam’s Knob in the Pisgah National Forest
After nearly a decade of studying and gathering public input, the U.S. Forest Service has released its final draft of the management plan for Pisgah and Nantahala National Forests. This plan will determine everything from logging projects to trail-building to wilderness designation. There are some very promising aspects to this new plan, including elevating the role of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee as consultants and the designation of the Big Ivy area as a “Forest Scenic Area.” Read about it here from the Carolina Public Press.
Also, read a condensed report from the U.S. Forest Service here.
From the Carolina Public Press, here is a really important article on the local tensions that have emerged over proposed designation of the Nolichucky River as a National Wild and Scenic River.
Click Here to Read Part I of the story in the Carolina Public Press.
Click Here to Read Part II of the story in the Carolina Public Press.
A multiyear effort to protect an iconic stretch of the Nolichucky River from the possibility of a future dam has hit a snag.
Despite widespread support, the proposal to add 7 miles of river, including a portion in Mitchell and Yancey counties, to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System lacks consensus among local residents.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, passed in 1968, protects rivers with remarkable characteristics, such as scenic or recreational value, and prevents the construction of dams or other projects that disrupt the free flow of these rivers.
According to Kevin Colburn, national stewardship director of American Whitewater, the law prevents changes that impact the river, while protecting local user values without limiting use.
“It’s a marquee river,” Colburn said. “My hope is to set aside a few of the last best rivers in the Southeast, and I feel like the Nolichucky is at the top of the list. It doesn’t get any better.
“Whitewater rivers have been severely impacted by dams, and there are few free-flowing rivers left as grand as the Nolichucky. It’s a special place.”
The remote river gorge one hour from Asheville is popular among hunters, hikers and anglers, as well as a whitewater paddling destination. The 115-mile river is one among a handful of major waterways in the Southeast whose flow is unrestricted.
While Congress creates the legislation to add each river to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, in practice, power is consolidated among local residents and a handful of elected officials who decide whether to lend their support.
Following several years of advocacy in January 2020, Colburn and others advocating for the river’s protection achieved a tough sell in Western North Carolina with county government support for federal land designation.
But just as soon as it was within their grasp, that support vanished.
In February 2020, the proposal became “toxic” due to an argument in opposition that Colburn says is false. He recently contacted local governments encouraging them to reconsider, but he’s worried that it may now be too late to act.
“The designation was positive, popular and a universally good thing,” Colburn said. “But the counties are the decision makers and ultimately decide on the future of this river.”
In 2017, Curtis English, a rafting company manager, started a petition to designate the Nolichucky River as Wild and Scenic. Still active, the petition has more than 21,000 signatures.
The petition states that the river has remarkable scenic, recreational, geological and ecological values and that designation will “invigorate local economies through increased tourism.”
Among the advocates was the Unicoi County, Tenn., economic development community that includes the commercial whitewater industry, which has a meaningful presence on the Tennessee side of the river.
According to a study conducted by Asheville-based Equinox Environmental, the Nolichucky could add nearly $5 million to the region’s outdoor recreation economy.
A citizens draft proposed designating 7.2 miles of the Nolichucky, 6 miles of which is within the state of North Carolina and forms the Yancey-Mitchell county line.
The proposed area stretches from Poplar, an unincorporated community in Mitchell County, to Unaka Springs, Tenn. It includes a roughly 0.25-mile corridor on each side of the river.
All of the land within the proposal is already owned by the federal government and resides within Pisgah National Forest in North Carolina and Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee.
If protected, the section would add to the 144.5 miles along five rivers within the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System in North Carolina.
In 1980, the National Park Service conducted a Wild and Scenic study of the entire length of the Nolichucky River. The study did not recommend protection.
In 1994, the U.S. Forest Service conducted a Wild and Scenic study and completed an environmental impact statement of the remote 7.2-mile section within the river’s gorge. The study concluded the section to be suitable for designation because of its “outstanding and remarkable geologic, scenic and recreational values.”
The federally mandated management plans for national forests also include rivers and streams that are “suitable” for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic system. The Forest Service may recommend rivers, but only Congress can designate them for inclusion in the system.
Eligible rivers within a national forest, however, must be managed to protect their free-flowing status and their “outstandingly remarkable value.”
Colburn anticipates that the future Pisgah and Nantahala National Forest Management Plan, currently in its final stages of development, will continue to include the Nolichucky as suitable and eligible for designation.
Following the circulation of the petition in 2017, Colburn attempted to consolidate enthusiasm for the designation into a singular effort and vision.
At the time, Colburn was seeking collaborative support for Wild and Scenic suitability for the Nolichucky and other Western North Carolina rivers as part of the Pisgah and Nantahala National Forest Management Plan revision process, expected to be finalized this year.
“There are 6,000 miles of Wild and Scenic rivers in Congress right now,” Colburn said. “There’s a lot of movement and bipartisan enthusiasm around the Wild and Scenic (designation). I felt like it was a great time to have this idea be introduced.” He added that protecting rivers often has bipartisan support in Congress.
Typically, however, designation follows a campaign to build community support and backing from local governments. It’s customary, Colburn said, that members of Congress require approval from local governments before initiating legislation.
Colburn said the designation effort was community-driven with significant support from regional recreation enthusiasts, businesses and economic development professionals.
American Whitewater has led several Wild and Scenic River support campaigns across the nation and provides technical support to develop proposals.
His role, he said, was to help share information with the press and decision makers about the designation.
In fact, initially there was enthusiasm from local governments.
Inspired by the effort to seek designation, Halley Burleson, a resident of Spruce Pine, lobbied local government officials in Mitchell and Yancey counties to support the designation, including members of the Mitchell County Commission, the Economic Development Commission and the county manager.
“I realized that someone needed to step up and take ownership,” Burleson told Carolina Public Press.
Colburn said American Whitewater eventually hired Burelson as a contractor to provide additional leadership.
In late 2019, Burleson and Colburn met with representatives of U.S. Sens. Richard Burr and Thom Tillis in Washington.
Based on those meetings, Colburn and other advocates felt that the senators would entertain co-sponsoring legislation pending county support.
Neither senator’s office responded to Carolina Public Press’ request for confirmation.
In January 2020, Burleson presented to both county commissions during their regular meetings. Following her presentations, both commissions voted to support the designation.
A Jan. 27, 2020, letter to Burr signed by Yancey County Manager Lynn Austin, extended the Yancey County commissioners’ support for Wild and Scenic designation.
“Not only is preservation key to future generations, but it is a huge player in our current economic well-being,” the letter said. “This designation is the best way to ensure the heritage of this river is maintained for the future generations to enjoy.”
Jacob Will, then-chairman of the Mitchell County Board of Commissioners, sent a similar letter to Burr and Tillis supporting the designation.
“Our county knows the importance of tourism and having outdoor destinations that can draw people into our county,” he wrote. “We ask that you help us protect this important river by designating the Nolichucky as a Wild and Scenic River.”
In addition, the economic development commissions of both Yancey and Mitchell counties sent letters to the senators supporting the designation.
Months prior to Burleson’s presentation, the Unicoi County Commission’s rafting, tourism and economic development committee hosted a public discussion in July 2019 to discuss the Wild and Scenic designation to address concerns of farmers and private property owners, with a second question-and-answer session on Jan. 30, 2020.
Colburn said he was invited to those discussions, which also included representatives of the U.S. Forest Service, local business owners and members of the farming community.
Among the opponents to the designation is Renea Jones, president of the Unicoi County Farm Bureau board of directors and operator of Jones and Church Farms. She said the designation will allow the federal government to condemn private land outside the boundaries of the proposal.
Jones understands the proposal is within national forest boundaries, but she isn’t convinced that the government won’t find a way to acquire more land.
She cited the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System website, which says, “Congress could ignore the agency recommendations and do something entirely different (e.g., designate a different segment from that recommended).”
“It can be done and has been done. I don’t want to take a chance on the Forest Service,” she said. “That’s a big part of it.”
According to the same website, the federal government “has rarely exercised its eminent domain powers.” “Nearly all” of the government’s use of condemnation occurred in the “early years” of the act’s implementation.
The American Farm Bureau Federation, or AFBF, is a national lobbying and insurance group with affiliates in all 50 states.
According to the Tennessee Farm Bureau’s 2019 resolutions, the organization opposes any additions to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System and “urges reevaluation of all existing wild and scenic rivers.”
That position is in line with the Farm Bureau’s national policy on Wild and Scenic Rivers.
Jones has said she is also concerned about the impact of the river’s designation on agricultural operations within the Nolichucky watershed and remains unconvinced that the designation is needed in the first place. She has disputed evidence that the designation would have a meaningful economic impact.
“It’s already owned by the Forest Service and already protected,” Jones said. “There are no better stewards than farmers. We want to protect the river. So, I think we all want the same thing, we just don’t agree on the means to get there. Additional government control is something that I just can’t understand why we would want to impose on ourselves.”
Despite the concerns Jones has voiced, Southeastern Environmental Law Center attorney Sam Evans said the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act does not regulate upstream pollution. Those regulations are guided by other legislation, such as the Clean Water Act or Endangered Species Act.
The government’s freedom to condemn private land is also restricted, Evans said.
“Within the boundaries of a designated Wild and Scenic River corridor, the Forest Service can theoretically take land to make it part of the unit,” said Evans, but he said the Forest Service has never done that in this region.
Additionally, Evans said, the legislation prohibits the Forest Service or any other public agency from exercising the right of eminent domain to condemn land if more than half of the land within the Wild and Scenic boundary is already federally owned.
Evans said 100% of the proposed Nolichucky designation is within federal ownership.
“Their argument doesn’t make legal sense,” Evans said.
“It’s a political argument. It’s a scare tactic to prevent the successful adoption of a community-led proposal to designate a Wild and Scenic River that people love and will continue to love and would be proud of.
“This has very little to do with the Nolichucky. It’s an abstract opposition to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.”
The push to designate a 6-mile stretch of the Nolichucky River as Wild and Scenic under federal law hit a snag in mid-2019.
A key turning point came after the Unicoi County, Tenn., tourism committee’s July 2019 meeting, at which the board tabled a resolution to recommend that the full Unicoi County Commission support the designation.
Kevin Colburn, national stewardship director for American Whitewater, had pushed for the designation since 2017. Even after the setback in mid-2019, he thought there was still a path to earn the trust and support of elected officials in Unicoi County.
“The county went through a healthy process of fact-finding,” he said.
“They did a great job of convening the right folks for discussions and listening. I certainly hoped support would emerge based on shared understanding of the facts.”
To that point, open opposition to the designation had come primarily from individuals in Tennessee. But things were changing on the North Carolina side of the line as well, as opposition to the designation began mounting upstream in Yancey and Mitchell counties.
A letter obtained by Carolina Public Press, dated Jan. 29, 2020, from Mickey Duvall, the executive director of the Mitchell County Economic Development Commission, suspended his previous “personal support” for the designation.
In the letter, Duvall cited calls received from members of the community concerned that the designation would limit citizens’ rights to use the river and its tributaries as they do now.
“Since this issue has now become somewhat controversial in our county,” Duvall wrote that he would invite Halley Burelson, a Spruce Pine resident, to address the Mitchell County Economic Development Commission to consider a formal letter of support.
Duvall did not comment or respond to questions about which citizens and how many had contacted him.
In February 2020, opponents of the designation addressed both Mitchell and Yancey county commissioners asking them to suspend support for the designation.
Allen McMurray, a local resident, spoke at both commissioner meetings. He said he represented interested citizens whom the river designation could affect.
In both meetings, McMurray asked commissioners to withdraw support.
McMurray said the designation would impact private landowners and he was concerned about the possibility of allowing the government to acquire private land through eminent domain, according to the Feb. 3, 2020, Mitchell County meeting minutes.
According to McMurray, the federal government could potentially enforce the use of fertilizers, spray material and restrict irrigation.
At the meeting, the Mitchell County Commission voted to “hold off” on supporting the designation and committed to hosting a public hearing, which eventually took place in August 2020.
McMurray did not respond to an interview request from CPP.
On Feb. 10, 2020, four members of the public addressed Yancey County commissioners during the public comment portion of the meeting. Kevin Wilson, a resident of Yancey County, requested that the commissioners rescind their letter of support.
Wilson, a farmer and employee of a mining company, told CPP he was contacted by Farm Bureau regarding concerns with the designation.
Objections to the Wild and Scenic Rivers designation that first surfaced in Tennessee also stemmed from Farm Bureau. Nationally, Farm Bureau has positioned itself in opposition to these river protections. Advocates in North Carolina have characterized the fears voiced in this opposition as contrary to fact and purely motivated by politics.
However, Wilson said he did his own research to understand the pros and cons of the designation.
According to an email sent to the county manager, the Yancey County Farm Bureau opposes the designation.
“The stretch of water is already managed by the Forest Service as a Wild and Scenic river,” Wilson said. “I feel there’s no need for duplicative regulation to be in place and opens us up for further regulation that may have unintended consequences down the road.”
He’s concerned that the Wild and Scenic designation will restrict the future operations of farmers in the Nolichucky watershed, which includes the Cane and North Toe rivers.
Wilson, who grew up on a tobacco farm in the Jack Creek community, currently raises cattle and harvests hay on a small farm. He considers the Nolichucky and its sources a “treasure.”
“Historically, the river was a dumping ground,” he said. “I would say in the last 50 years the water quality has improved dramatically. It’s a success story. Farmers want a clean river more than anyone; it’s our most important asset.”
Renea Jones of the Tennessee Farm Bureau attended the February Mitchell and Yancey county meetings but said she was not in contact with elected officials in either county.
Jones said both meetings had standing-room crowds, most of whom, she thought, opposed the designation.
“(The proponents of the designation) railroaded it right in without giving the opponents an opportunity to show that it’s not as good as it sounds,” she said. “They presented it to the commission that (the designation) was low-hanging fruit. That it was this great thing.”
Burelson disagreed: “I provided the information to make an educated decision. I did my due diligence. I wanted to make sure that my hands were clean and that I was operating with integrity.”
On March 9, 2020, the Yancey County Commission voted unanimously to rescind its letter of support.
“At first, it sounded really, really good,” Yancey County Manager Lynn Austin told CPP. “I guess we should have held off until we learned more and then weighed the pros and cons. We just need to find out more about it and dig a little deeper for ourselves.”
Austin said Yancey County’s position is “neutral.” None of the Yancey County commissioners responded to a request for comment from CPP.
Jamie McMahan, director of the Yancey County EDC, said the agency’s original support letter still stands as the official record; however, the EDC board has not “revisited the conversation.”
“I certainly wouldn’t contradict the position of the County Commission from a public policy point of view,” he said.
“I recognize that there is an economic benefit associated with (the designation) and tourism is a growing sector of our economy,” said McMahan, who does not have a personal position on the designation. He indicated that economic development as a result of tourism is guided by the county’s Chamber of Commerce.
In August 2020, Mitchell County hosted a public meeting in Poplar, an unincorporated community near a public access facility at the proposed Wild and Scenic boundary.
Mitchell County Commissioner Brandon Pittman estimated that more than 100 people attended the meeting, with “overwhelming opposition to the project from the Poplar, Bradshaw and Tipton Hill communities.”
“I have no personal opposition to this project; however, I’m not willing to ignore my constituents who live in the communities around the Nolichucky River,” he said. “Regardless of my personal feelings, my job is to be their voice.
“I believe that the Nolichucky River is a beautiful asset to Mitchell County, and it deserves protection,” he said. However, he questioned whether it needed additional protection since the U.S. Forest Service already manages it.
“I would be willing to entertain further discussion on the topic granted there was new information that hasn’t already been presented,” he said, including “concrete data” supporting the hypothesis that the designation would provide economic benefits to Mitchell County.
Matthew Vern Grindstaff, chairman of Mitchell County Board of Commissioners, did not attend the August 2020 meeting, but based on reports from fellow board members and phone conversations, he said that “it was abundantly clear that the community did not support the designation. Unless the community had a change of heart, I would be in opposition.”
Grindstaff said it is accurate that the previous board did not support the designation but said the current board does not have a position.
Colburn commended Mitchell County for hosting the August 2020 meeting but said there wasn’t a meaningful discussion due to “disruptive” attendees. The meeting was described by a report in the Mitchell News-Journal as “contentious.”
According to the News-Journal, supporters of the designation who spoke were interrupted, and the moderator struggled to maintain order.
The sudden turn in support in Mitchell and Yancey counties stunned Colburn after several years of working on the river designation.
“I understand the fear when someone says the government is coming to take your land,” Colburn said. “I’d be freaked out, too. I would be angry and I would be asking these hard questions. But the facts don’t support their concerns.”
In November, Colburn sent letters to county commissioners in Yancey and Mitchell counties asking that they renew their support.
“I’ve spent 20 years working with the (Wild and Scenic Rivers) act, and when someone says, ‘This is the way it is,’ and provides false information, how do you argue with that?” Colburn said.
“It came as a surprise and was demoralizing because we spent years building this idea based on reams of information. And it just got shredded in a matter of weeks because of something that has nothing to do with our campaign and, frankly, nothing to do with reality.
“This designation was and remains a simple, good and popular thing for the area’s people and the river. It has no downside. We hoped that all three counties would be supportive, and that is the path to designation that we saw and have been working toward.”
Colburn said he’s made peace with the counties’ neutrality.
“Right now, that means the designation is not going to happen in the near term,” he said. “I think it passes up a great opportunity, but I respect that it’s their choice.”
Burleson has taken a few punches, too, for her advocacy, although she expected that her position would be controversial.
At the Poplar meeting, she was accused of profiting from the designation effort and was supported financially for her advocacy. Burleson works part time for the nonprofit conservation organization Wild South and as a contractor for American Whitewater.
Despite meaningful support dispersed across the counties, state and nation, she recognizes that the views of those who live near the river transmit a hefty weight.
“Everyone has their own beliefs and values,” she said. “I’m standing up for mine. Even though I support it and would like to see it happen, at the end of the day I respect the decision of my community.”
Former Dalton State College Professor Donald E. Davis’s new book, The American Chestnut: An Environmental History, has been published by the University of Georgia Press. In conducting research for my own book, I constantly came across references to chestnuts in the primary sources. Appalachian people used the wood as a versatile building material, its nuts as a food for humans and livestock and as an important tradeable commodity. Its demise in the early twentieth century due to blight was one of the most destructive and tragic ecological events mountain people had ever experienced. I attended a book talk Davis gave last month at Dalton State, and it was a delight to finally see the final product of some 20 years of research. The American Chestnut is sure to become the standard environmental history of one of the most useful tree species in American history.
Click here to order your copy.
Order your copy now of Ginseng Diggers: A History of Root and Herb Gathering in Appalachia, by yours truly, Luke Manget. Order through University Press of Kentucky
Here’s a description: The harvesting of wild American ginseng (panax quinquefolium), the gnarled, aromatic herb known for its therapeutic and healing properties, is deeply established in North America and has played an especially vital role in the southern and central Appalachian Mountains. Traded through a trans-Pacific network that connected the region to East Asian markets, ginseng was but one of several medicinal Appalachian plants that entered international webs of exchange. As the production of patent medicines and botanical pharmaceutical products escalated in the mid- to late-nineteenth century, southern Appalachia emerged as the United States' most prolific supplier of many species of medicinal plants. The region achieved this distinction because of its biodiversity and the persistence of certain common rights that guaranteed widespread access to the forested mountainsides, regardless of who owned the land.
Following the Civil War, root digging and herb gathering became one of the most important ways landless families and small farmers earned income from the forest commons. This boom influenced class relations, gender roles, forest use, and outside perceptions of Appalachia, and began a widespread renegotiation of common rights that eventually curtailed access to ginseng and other plants.
Based on extensive research into the business records of mountain entrepreneurs, country stores, and pharmaceutical companies, Ginseng Diggers: A History of Root and Herb Gathering in Appalachia is the first book to unearth the unique relationship between the Appalachian region and the global trade in medicinal plants. Historian Luke Manget expands our understanding of the gathering commons by exploring how and why Appalachia became the nation's premier purveyor of botanical drugs in the late-nineteenth century and how the trade influenced the way residents of the region interacted with each other and the forests around them.
