[ End of article ]

The Finns of the Pacific Coast of the United States, and Consideration of the Problem of Scientific Land Settlement

Eugene Van Cleef

In 1915 I undertook a field investigation of Finnish settlements in northeastern Minnesota, in the hope of determining whether or not these settlements are in anyway affected by geographic conditions with which they come into contact. I was not interested especially in the theory of environmentalism, but rather in an opportunity to test out the more or less tenuous theory held at that time, that human migration was effected along isotherms. Of course, all that I could hope to do was to determine the underlying factors affecting the movements of the Finns rather than to establish any sweeping generalizations applicable to all peoples.

This first inquiry was subsequently expanded to include Finns in other parts of the United States, in Canada, in the Baltic Region and in Finland itself. Among various published papers based upon the results of these observations and having a special bearing upon the current presentation, the following are cited:

"The Finn in America", Geographical Review, Vol. VI, No. 3, Sept. 1918, pp. 185-214.
"The Finns of Cape Cod", New England Quarterly, Vol. VI, No. 3, September 1933, pp. 597-601.
"The Finns in Ohio", Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, Vol. XLIII, No. 4, Oct. 1934, pp. 452-460.

Part I of this discussion which now follows is the fourth paper in a series of observations treating the subject of Finnish settlement in America. This paper is based upon recent field work among Finnish settlements in the Pacific Coast States. In Part II I shall consider the problem of scientific land settlement in the light of Finnish activities in land occupance during the past three-quarters of a century.

Part I. The Finns of the Pacific Coast

The reasons for the settlement of Finns in our western states parallel in many respects those for settlement in the eastern part of the nation. The objectives of the Finns were a better living and an opportunity to rear a family in a favorable environment. These migrants sought a habitat in which they might capitalize their skills rather than engage in work wholly foreign to themselves. The major environments which attracted them were forests, potential agricultural lands, fishing grounds, navigable waterways and minerals, all similar in their major characteristics to environments in their home country. Even soils, topography, climate and the general aspects of the landscape in the vicinity of most Finnish settlements in America corresponded strikingly with those in Finland.

While there is evidence that a few of the first Finns were enticed by the California Gold Rush of 1849, their numbers were unimportant and their influence upon the migration of other Finns was negligible. Some Finnish sailors arriving at San Francisco as early as the decade 1850-1860 left their ships to join other pioneers, much as Finnish sailors deserted at Boston in 1860. The bulk of the settlers consisted of Finns who came either direct from Finland or from the eastern states with the avowed purpose of becoming permanent residents. Many found employment in the redwood lumber industry of Mendocino and Humboldt counties. Others moved in the direction of Los Angeles and still others migrated northward reaching Marchfield and North Bend, Oregon, about 1865. The completion of the first transcontinental railroad in 1869 was a stimulus to the movement westward of a small number of Finns then living in the Great Lakes Region. About 1870 Finns filtered into Astoria, Oregon, sailors once more leading the vanguard. They were followed in 1873-4 and again in 1877 by groups from Ohio, Pennsylvania and later from the "Copper Country" of Michigan and from western Finland.1 By 1880 Finns began to settle in the State of Washington, the source of supply being essentially the same as for the other states. After the World War many Finns moved into the Los Angeles-San Pedro district, a region lacking some of the physical characteristics of a "normal" Finnish landscape. Today in Los Angeles County there are nearly 3,000 Finns. Other present-day California Finnish centers are the cities of Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco, and the counties of Mendocino and Humboldt. The numbers of settlers have grown substantially in all of the coastal states, slightly exceeding 16,000 in California, 12,000 in Oregon and 22,000 in Washington.2 In the states immediately east of the Pacific Coast group, scattered Finnish communities occur but since their numbers are relatively few and the reasons for their existence are similar to those for the coastal groups, further consideration of them is unnecessary. The map (Fig. 1) indicates their distribution as well as that of other areas of Finnish occupance in this country.

One of the western settlements of particular interest is that of Reedley, California.3 Since its location, like that of the group of Finns in Los Angeles County, seems anomalous, for reasons we shall cite, and since the settlement is of fair size, we record its history in some detail.

The Reedley colony grew out of the "Russification" program instituted in Finland during the latter part of the nineteenth century. An exile by the name of Wahren, trained as an agronomist, came to the United States about 1900 from western Finland with the idea of locating land suitable for Finnish settlement, intending to encourage other unhappy Finns in Finland at that time to emigrate to this country. He seemed bent upon a climate more salubrious than that in Finland. His survey of possibilities led him to the San Joaquin Valley, California, where he came upon a colony of Swedes near Kingsburg and Selma. Convinced by the Swedes that this locality was wholly satisfactory for peoples from high latitudes of Europe, Wahren bought land in 1906 about 10 miles upstream from Kingsburg along the Kings River near Reedley. This was a conscious selection of frontage intended to provide waterscapes for future farmers, a setting which would be comparable in some respects to that from which the prospective settlers were expected to come.

At this time, the land was planted primarily in wheat. Grape culture was in its infancy. Wahren advertised the land in Finland as suitable for general agriculture, thus appealing to a number of Finns, glad to escape Russian oppression and to cast their lot with others in a region of seemingly abundant opportunity. He also advertised in Finnish papers published in Northern Michigan, in New York and elsewhere. The immigrants had little money and hence found it necessary, as Wahren did originally, to engage in lumbering in the camps4 of the nearby Sierra Nevadas until they accumulated enough cash to begin the purchase of small acreages for agricultural purposes. This procedure was typical of that followed by Finnish settlers in New England and the Great Lakes region. The colony now numbers about 400 engaged largely in the raisin industry and in the production of apricots, peaches and oranges. In the entire valley area there may be close to 1000 Finns.

Fig. 1. Distribution of Finns in the United States. Each dot represents 500 Finns; the large dot for New York City is proportional to the small dots. (Data from U. S. Census, 1930.)

The number of Finns scattered throughout states in which no data appear is so small as to be negligible.

The striking concentration of Finns in high latitudes was the basis for suspecting a play of geographic elements in their settlement Only groups located in the southern half of California appear to be a departure from the seemingly "normal" areas of occupance by Finns. For an explanation, see the text.

The maps are drawn on Goode's Base Maps (H. M. Leppard, editor), published by the University of Chicago Press.

The presence of Finns in Reedley and in the Los Angeles district, we have said, seems to be anomalous. We have pointed out here as in earlier writings (cited at the beginning of this paper) that the Finns generally established themselves in regions physically similar to those in the home country. Probably the greatest disparity between these localities and Finland is associated with the climate. There is no resemblance between the climate at Reedley itself and that of Finland. Nevertheless, within less than fifty miles of Reedley one may enter a climatic region in the Sierra Nevada mountains not unlike that of parts of Finland. It was in this environment that the first Finns spent much time earning their living in lumber camps. Hence, during the early growth of Reedley these people lived in a sort of compromise climatic environment, namely a hot semi-arid climate in the valley and a continental type in the mountains5 nearby. These same mountains likewise offered forest types and rock exposures similar to those in the home country. In the winter, snow was available for skiing or other sports (Fig. 2). Thus, any longing the settlers might have had for reminders of the homeland were largely satisfied.6

In the case of the colonies of Finns in the Los Angeles district, the ocean has been an important factor, affording an outlet for activities associated with the sea and providing sites for summer residences in proximity to a water body. Then too, the nearby mountain landscapes including winter snows furnish an additional "home" background. These factors have played a critical rôle in supplying elements of interest to the Finns, probably, discounting such aspects as aridity and high temperatures. In spite of these two partial exceptions to the usual reactions of Finns, it is still valid to say that the major environments which hold the interest of the western Finns, as also of the eastern Finns, are the forests, fishing grounds, navigable waters, relatively wet agricultural lands, and minerals.

Fig. 2. Mean Annual Snowfall and Finnish Settlement. Each dot represents 1000 Finns, except that for New York City, which is proportional. Snowfall is recorded in inches, after Climatic Maps of North America, by C. F. Brooks, A. J. Cronin, and others (Harvard University Press, 1936).

The Finn expresses an unqualified desire to live where snow is accessible, although not necessarily excessive. In the southern half of Finland where most of the population of that country lives, the total fall ranges only slightly more than in the Great Lakes Region and Northeastern United States. Hence, the coincidence of settlement and snowfall areas in this country is not surprising.

The striking exception noted in the Pacific Coastal areas is explained in terms of the attraction of certain other physical conditions upon the lowlands with abundant snow easily accessible in the nearby mountains.

The appeal of the waterscape, the coniferous forests, boulder strewn and rock-exposed surfaces, and winter snows is not to be interpreted as applying only to those engaged in so-called menial occupations. Lawyers, physicians, journalists, teachers, and many others are attracted by these natural elements. One might contend that since these persons minister to the wants of the manual laboring Finns, their presence bears no relation to the character of the geographical environment; that it is purely owing to economic reasons. However, a large number of interviews with these Finns, including inquiries among key persons, reveals unequivocal evidence that they would not be wholly contented in other kinds of environments, albeit under extreme economic pressure they might eventually make a satisfactory adjustment.

Fig. 3. Major Soil Types in the Regions of Finnish Settlement. Each dot represents 1000 Finns, except that for New York City, which is proportional. Soil types are generalized from the map "Soil Associations of the United States" in Men and Soils (U. S. Dept. Agric., 1938).

1.- Podzols.
2.- Gray-brown Podzolic Soils.
3.- Non-calcic Brown Soils.
4.- Alluvial Soils.

In the vicinity of San Francisco and Los Angeles small unruled areas are characterized by Prairie Soils.

The occurrence of Finnish settlements in the Podzol soil areas is consistent with their distribution in Finland. There too the soils are largely Podzols or Podzolic. Finns show a preference for poorly drained lands. In the regions of Gray brownerths they reveal a similar choice. Within the Podzolic areas of the Pacific Coast are small Podzol areas, many of which are concentration localities for Finnish population.

It seems safe to conclude that the Finns in America reflect a high degree of sensitivity to their physical environment. This response is so positive as to allow of prediction relative to the types of areas in which considerable numbers of Finns seeking sites for permanent occupance are likely to settle. Correspondence of settlement with particular physical phenomena is illustrated by maps upon which both settlements and physical conditions are shown (Figs. 2, 3, 4). If these maps be compared with corresponding maps of Finland (see Atlas of Finland), striking coincidences may be seen.7 While coincidence does not always establish cause and effect, in this instance objective investigation throughout the nation and in foreign lands has shown that there is a positive correlation. That correlation is better expressed by the maps themselves than it could be by an elaborate detailed word description of the maps.

Fig. 4. Forest Types and Settlement. Each dot represents 1000 Finns, except that for New York City, which is proportional. Western Forests generalized from Natural Vegetation by H. L. Shantz and Raphael Zon (U. S. Dept. Agric., 1924). Eastern forests after E. N. Transeau, prepared for this paper.

Western Forests: Largely Douglas Fir, Yellow Pine, Sugar Pine, and Redwood.

Eastern Forests: Mixed Conifers and Northern Hardwoods: White Pine, Red Pine, Hemlock, White Spruce, Black Spruce, Red Spruce, White Birch, Yellow Birch, Sugar Maple, Beech.

As in Finland so in the United States, Finns occupy regions where the forest is coniferous-evergreen or birch, or where these two are mixed. Deciduous broadleaved trees are secondary. The species of trees here and in Finland are not in all cases identical but they are equivalent in type.

In consequence of my first survey in the Lake Superior region (1915-18), the suggestion was made that those who are "encouraging foreigners to settle" the land should encourage the Finn rather than other nationalities because "fundamental facts of his evolution within a well-defined environment" gave "assurance for the agricultural development of northeastern Minnesota".8 Thus, from the standpoint of the possibilities of settlement of northeastern Minnesota in particular, I attempted to appraise not only the nature of the land and its potentialities, but the characteristics of the people who sought to occupy and develop it. Subsequent studies such as that represented by observations noted above among Pacific Coast Finns as well as those in other areas and comparisons of the American and Finnish natural regions have lent additional support to the contention that in the settlement of new regions, the original habitat of the prospective settler is a matter for serious consideration.

Part II. Consideration of the Problem of Scientific Land Settlement

The philosophy here set forth that human characteristics, so far as the Finns are concerned, are closely related to particular physical environments has an important bearing upon the current broader problems associated with settlement and land-use. No claim is made for originating the point of view. I merely present contributory evidence. Bowman recently emphasized the importance of man in the problem of settlement when he said "Geography cannot be useful in the creative experiment unless it measures man as well as his environment...9 The conclusions here presented substantiate this assertion.

Since my first search for light upon the relation between Finnish migration and the geographic factor, several elaborate investigations have been made by others into the general problems of settlement in relation to landuse. These have been stimulated largely by a desire to find a way out of the nation-wide if not world-wide economic depression. At this point, an examination of some of the important concepts expressed in these studies is worthwhile.

In his investigations into pioneer settlement, Bowman10 urges a scientific approach to the problem. However, in his chapter "Science Plays a Part" he directs attention to the practical aspects which may offset conclusions arrived at through science. For example, he cites what irrigation of our western lands has accomplished and remarks that whereas scientifically speaking, irrigation has worked, its effect upon settlement has not been anything to boast about. "The total farming population upon the twentyfour national irrigation projects of the West after twenty years of government aid and generosity was but 140,000" (p. 77). But viewing the problem from the standpoint of opening new lands with the aid of peoples already skilled in irrigation he says, "yet if we were to import Egyptians they would make our government reclamation schemes work because they would accept a standard of living unthinkably low for us" (p. 78).

While the standard of living might be low, so far as many persons in the United States are concerned, we cannot overlook the fact that the concept of "standard of living" is purely relative and that two standards, one of which seems to some of us to be much lower than another, need not mean unhappiness for those who are experiencing the lower standard. Certainly, if we had Egyptians in the United States who had had irrigation experience in their original habitat, the scientific approach to the settlement of our irrigated lands would lead us to encourage them to settle on such lands rather than those elements of the population who knew only wet lands. By Bowman's own admission "The technique of farming, if well known to you, is the one you can put into practice without misgiving" (ibid., p. 37). This is an important statement. Certainly, to ask those without such technique to engage in farming would seem to be even more hazardous than to ask farmers to adapt themselves to unfamiliar occupations in urban communities.

From the point of view of certain persons, the Finns who now are farming small acreages of the boulder-strewn wild lands of New England or some of the muskeg of the upper Great Lakes Region or the cut-over lands of Washington and Oregon, subscribe to a low standard of living and hence are leading an unsatisfactory existence. Such a conclusion could be drawn only by those who fail to understand the temperament of the Finn and who have had no intimate association with Finns. A geographer who appreciates the relativity of this idea of standards, investigating a Community of Finns in Minnesota, offers some pointed comments in this connection.11 He recognizes that in spite of the fact the Finns are having a hard struggle for existence, "it would be a serious mistake to move them to a better area". He does suggest ways that might alleviate the struggle somewhat without unsettling the land. However, he is reluctant to move them elsewhere, because he realizes that in the face of seemingly low standards, they are more nearly contented in their present locality than they would be even on highly productive land.

In another recent population inquiry,12 an effort was made to determine not only "the relationship between migration and economic opportunity" but the "most effective utilization of our human and material resources". Data were collected relative to migratory movements into previously unoccupied areas and those from farm to city and city to farm. Whereas the authors had hoped at the outset that an immediate solution to their problem might be forthcoming, they quickly became aware that their project involved "the permanence and stability of employment" rather than temporary relief. Hence they posed the question "where will people have the best long run chance of making a good living?"

Though the study was thorough in many respects, the authors apparently overlooked perhaps the most critical factor of all, namely, the capacities of various types of peoples. Their nearest approach to the recognition of this aspect occurs in their review of the approach to the problem of settlement in Germany. There the government controlled migration and in doing so took cognizance of the skills of those about to be transferred from one region to another. Although ethnic or racial factors were virtually of no significance, a distinction was made between persons who had had agricultural training or experience and those who had not. Parenthetically, reference might be made to the method applied in Latvia when that country broke up landed estates after the war and settled them. Officials permitted only those persons to occupy acreage, who could give proof of first-hand familiarity with soil cultivation. As a result, the settlement "mortality rate" at the end of the first five years was less than twenty per cent.

"To determine the possibilities of settlement in any region account must also be taken of the people who are expected to settle in the region. From what lands and climates do they come? Does the stock still display pioneering aptitudes?"13 This succinct statement by Bowman might well have been deduced from the record of settlement made by the Finns. The story of Finnish settlement gives validity to that statement, at least insofar as this particular nationality is concerned. No assertion is made that it is true for others.

In the same publication edited by Dr. Bowman, one contributor, Dr. Carl O. Sauer, seems to believe that the problem of settlement is no longer an important matter at least so far as world-wide movements are concerned.

He states "... it appears to this commentator that the population of the world has become sedentary permanently; that most of its inhabitants are where they belong". He admits that individuals may migrate but their "offspring will not be colonists. They will pass into the communities that receive them" (p. 23). One cannot be certain whether Sauer believes that all peoples in the United States are now where they belong. While we may not ordinarily expect migratory movements such as those of the past 2000 years to be continued during the next similar period, yet to conclude that migrations are about over is perhaps a bit premature. More probable it is that we are entering upon an era in which migration will occur under scientific guidance and in general with greater intelligence than in times past. Hence, it is of the utmost importance to analyze minutely man's past and present experiences in order that future readjustments and realignments of population may be accomplished in the interests of the maximum welfare of both the individuals concerned and the nation.

That the importance of considering the adaptability of peoples to a given milieu has been recognized by a few organizations having a share in planned settlement is revealed in a statement by W. A. Mackintosh in his chapter on "Canada as an Area for Settlement" in the book on Limits of Land Settlement just cited. Mackintosh in discussing immigration into Canada prior to 1930 says:14 "Greater encouragement was given to immigrants from northern than from southern Europe." This program was in the hands largely of two railroad companies, organizations that learned by the method of trial and error, but nevertheless learned well.

Evidence is also available to show that adaptability involves not only experience with the materials of a given environment but a "way of life", and this is something more than mere "standard of living" as that expression is commonly interpreted. The concept is reflected in statements made by Hartman and Black based upon their studies of the economic aspects of settlement in the cut-over lands of the Great Lakes region.15 These men discuss farm reversion, that is, abandonment in various unit areas of the region and reach certain pertinent conclusions with reference to the Finns and to foreign land-owners in general. They say: "Regardless of this situation (that is, low wet cut-over lands) there is little farm abandonment, (in Settlement Area 17)16 and a strong cooperative community spirit prevails. All but three of the settlers surveyed were Finns who had had farm experience before settling here. These Finlanders have proved to be hard workers and willing cooperators. As a consequence, abandoned farms are likely to be few in number."

Again with reference to Settlement Areas 18 to 33 they say: "Finlanders predominated in 8 of the remaining 13 areas showing less than 10 per cent of farm reversion between 1920 and 1928; Danes predominated in 4 areas, and natives of Austria-Hungary constituted the majority of settlers in the remaining 2 areas. Although it would be necessary to analyze many contributing factors in order to account for the lack of or small amount of farm reversion in settlement areas 18 to 33, observations suggest that nativity of settlers is of primary importance. The land in three areas (19, 29, and 33) is of poor quality for farming purposes, and in areas 23 and 32 it varies from good to poor; yet farm abandonment by the foreign-born settlers is decidedly lacking. One of the reasons for this is that, in general, foreign-born settlers are willing to work longer and harder and maintain a lower standard of living than is the average native-born settler. They are willing to sacrifice more than the average to satisfy a desire for land ownership."

Hartman and Black refer to the willingness of these foreigners (including the Finns of course) to "maintain a lower standard of living than is the average native-born settler." However, this assertion is really off-set by the sentence which follows, if we interpret land ownership as evidence of high standards. The Finns will accept a "lower standard in order to satisfy a desire for land ownership." Actually, this does not mean that they accept a lower standard permanently. In the first place, they are pioneering on the lands in question, a stage of economic activity which demands sacrifices. Secondly, they must accept "a lower standard of living" which this stage involves in order ultimately to achieve their goal, namely, land ownership which usually is accepted as an index of high standards.

Oftentimes experts classify lands as submarginal having in mind certain standards of living which would satisfy their own needs. They overlook the fact that what is submarginal for some may become marginal in the hands of others; that what may be "unprofitable" for some settlers may be profitable for others. Satisfactions, contentment and other elements that seem to make life worthwhile are relative and to the Finns, accustomed to given types of natural environments, these satisfying factors may be forthcoming when to other peoples they may not. That this is the case is readily demonstrable by the Finns' own testimony and observations among them as pointed out in the papers cited at the beginning of this presentation, and in secondary papers not listed here. In any scientific analysis of land occupance, we should not overlook this point of view. There are persons who argue that the national well-being is paramount to that of a particular individual or group and, therefore, human energy should be spent upon lands which will yield the largest returns for the effort put forth. However important such a policy may be, it does not relieve us from our duty when classifying lands with a view toward their potentialities for settlement, to give analytical consideration not alone to the lands, but to the human half of the equation. We cannot afford to lose sight of the well founded statement that a nation consists not alone of land but of land plus people with the intelligence to use it.

I have cited evidence not only in this paper but elsewhere to show that so far as concerns Finns, the physical environment must incorporate something other than mere potentialities for successful farming if these people are to be attracted to land for permanent settlement. Finns have refused time and again to settle in areas where survival was relatively easy. They have refused because the climate was not to their liking, or because the landscape lacked a coniferous vegetation, or because there was no waterscape close at hand or the soil types were unfamiliar to them. It is possible that this highly sensitive response of the Finns to their geographic environment is unique; that other people do not react in this manner. This remains to be demonstrated. The record of the Finns observed over a score of years would seem to warrant similar studies among other ethnic elements.

Where nations possess a more or less homogeneous population, settlement adjustments are relatively simple. Perhaps under such circumstances the significant factor to be interpreted is the effect which length of residence in given environments may have had upon the respective inhabitants; but in a nation like the United States where there are not only diverse habitats in striking contrast to each other, but diverse ethnic groups and individuals, the problem is greatly complicated. Scientific settlement demands investigations of the reactions of peoples to their original habitats as well as their reactions to their adopted environments. In his book on the Pioneer Fringe, Bowman recognizes that even "modern pioneers differ from country to country and each type has its own standards of comfort and success" (p. 9). And again "Some races are tolerable to social isolation; others are not" (p. 10). These are points that may not be ignored "if there is to be a greater degree of social control over the distribution of population" as Goodrich and others advocate,17 a control whose "main purpose should be not to reduce human mobility but to make use of it and to give it surer direction and guidance" (p. 9).

The Ohio State University,
May, 1939

1 Finnish residents of Astoria assert that in 1870 there were 250 to 300 Finns in Clatsop County, whose total pnpulation was 1255. The U. S. Census of 1930 credited 4507 Finns to this country.

2 Some data bearing upon western settlement were supplied in correspondence with Rev. S. Ilmonen, Fort Bragg, California, a Finnish authority on this subject. Assistance was also rendered by E. E. Pajunen, Vice Consul of Finland, Astoria, Oregon, and Karl P. Heideman, Seattle.

3 Korsinen, Frank: Historia, etc. translated in part by Rev. Raymond Wargelin, Berkeley, California. Also correspondence with both Korsinen, an original settler, and Wargelin, quoting some of the other settlers still occupying land in or near Reedley.

4 They were employed by a lumber company no longer operating, to work in the redwood forests. (From statement by Frank Korsinen, one of the first Finns to work in these forests.)

5 A Finn has suggested that adaptation of the settlers to the heat of the Reedley and Los Angeles localities might be attributed to the steam bath, an institution to which all Finns even in the United States, are habitués. As extreme as this view may seem to be, it is consistent with the fact that in steel mills and other factories where certain processes require workers who can withstand excessive temperatures and who have great muscular stamina, Finns, if available, are assigned to such operations. This ability to withstand high temperatures when necessary may, of course, be an inherent anthropological characteristic. Its correct explanation still remains to be established.

6 "Lack of experience in irrigation methods resulted in failures at first and in considerable hardship. But Finnish persistence asserted itself, resulting in survival and success." Statement by Frank Korsinen.

7 Space does not allow of the presentation of other maps, such as mean annual maximum temperature, mean annual minimum temperature, or a geological map, which reveal similar striking relationships between settlement and physical environment.

8 Van Cleef, Eugene: "The Finn in America", op. cit., p. 214.

9 Bowman, Isaiah: "Geography in the Creative Experiment", Geographical Review, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1, January, 1938, p. 4.

10 Bowman, Isaiah: The Pioneer Fringe, American Geographical Society, New York, 1931, Special Publication No. 13, 345 pp. & Index.

11 Davis, D. H.: "The Finland Community," Geographical Review, Vol. XXV, No. 3, July 1935, pp. 382-394. Also private correspondence with Davis.

12 Migration and Economic Opportunity, Report of the Study of Population Redistribution by Carter Goodrich and others. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1936, 741 pp. and index.

13 Bowman, Isaiah, and others: Limits of Land Settlement - A Report on Present-day Possibilities. Council on Foreign Relations, N. Y., 1937, p. 3.

14 Op. cit., p. 81.

15 Hartman, W. A., and Black, J. D.: ''Economic Aspects of Land Settlement in the Cut-over Region of the Great Lakes States". Circular 160, U.S.D.A., April, 1931, pp. 77-78.

16 References to Settlement Areas in these quotations are to units which the investigators set up for their own convenience in making their survey. Their detailed location has no significance in this paper.

17 Goodrich, Carter, Allin, B. W., and Hayes, Marion: Migration and Planes of Living, 1920-1934. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1935, 111 pp.

Published in Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Vol. XXX, 1940, p. 25-38.

[ Beginning of article ]