There are critical needs for a nationwide compilation of reliable shoreline data. To meet these needs, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has produced a comprehensive database of digital vector shorelines by compiling shoreline positions from pre-existing historical shoreline databases and by generating historical and modern shoreline data. Shorelines are compiled by state and generally correspond to one of four time periods: 1800s, 1920s-1930s, 1970s, and 1998-2002. Each shoreline may represent a compilation of data from one or more sources for one or more dates provided by one or more agencies. Details regarding source are provided in the 'Data Quality Information' section of this metadata report. Shoreline vectors derived from historic sources (first three time periods) represent the high water line at the time of the survey, whereas modern shorelines (final time period) represent the mean high water line.

We summarize available information on Pacific walrus haulouts from available reports, interviews with coastal residents and aviators, and personal observations of the authors. We provide this in the form of a georeferenced database that may be queried and displayed with standard geographic information system and database management software. The database contains 150 records of Pacific walrus haulouts, with a summary of basic characteristics on maximum haulout size, age-sex composition, season of use, and decade of most recent use. Citations to reports are provided as a bibliographic database.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has the statutory mandate to collect hydrographic data in support of nautical chart compilation for safe navigation and to provide background data for engineers, scientific, and other commercial and industrial activities. Hydrographic survey data primarily consist of water depths, but may also include features (e.g. rocks, wrecks), navigation aids, shoreline identification, and bottom type information. NOAA is responsible for archiving and distributing the source data as described in this metadata record.

Shorelines and upland/marsh boundaries from National Ocean Survey maps (1852, 1871, 1910, 1919,), aerial photos (1943, 1967, 1980, 1990), and satellite TM scene (1993). Update: John Porter added 2001 based on digitization of a 10/15/2001 IKONOS satellite image. The high tide line was digitized on the beach based on the edge of the wetted sand. For the marsh, the marsh-lagoon border was digitized. The upland/marsh boundary is not included for 2001. This is dataset has been superceded by dataset VCR01078, which includes a combined shapefile for all shorelines from all years.

Shorelines and upland/marsh boundaries from National Ocean Survey maps (1852, 1871, 1910, 1919,), aerial photos (1943, 1967, 1980, 1990), and satellite TM scene (1993). Update: John Porter added 2001 based on digitization of a 10/15/2001 IKONOS satellite image. The high tide line was digitized on the beach based on the edge of the wetted sand. For the marsh, the marsh-lagoon border was digitized. The upland/marsh boundary is not included for 2001. This is dataset has been superceded by dataset VCR01078, which includes a combined shapefile for all shorelines from all years.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has the statutory mandate to collect hydrographic data in support of nautical chart compilation for safe navigation and to provide background data for engineers, scientific, and other commercial and industrial activities. Hydrographic survey data primarily consist of water depths, but may also include features (e.g. rocks, wrecks), navigation aids, shoreline identification, and bottom type information. NOAA is responsible for archiving and distributing the source data as described in this metadata record.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Woodcreek population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Woodcreek across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2022, the population of Woodcreek was 1,852, a 2.66% increase year-by-year from 2021. Previously, in 2021, Woodcreek population was 1,804, an increase of 1.41% compared to a population of 1,779 in 2020. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2022, population of Woodcreek increased by 563. In this period, the peak population was 1,852 in the year 2022. The numbers suggest that the population has not reached its peak yet and is showing a trend of further growth. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2022

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2022)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Woodcreek is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Woodcreek population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Woodcreek Population by Year. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Biscoe population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Biscoe across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Biscoe was 1,852, a 0.98% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Biscoe population was 1,834, a decline of 0.54% compared to a population of 1,844 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Biscoe increased by 107. In this period, the peak population was 1,852 in the year 2023. The numbers suggest that the population has not reached its peak yet and is showing a trend of further growth. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Biscoe is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Biscoe population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Biscoe Population by Year. You can refer the same here

PLEASE NOTE: This is an index of a historical collection that contains words and phrases that may be offensive or harmful to individuals investigating these records. In order to preserve the objectivity and historical accuracy of the index, State Archives staff took what would today be considered archaic and offensive descriptions concerning race, ethnicity, and gender directly from the original court papers. For more information on appropriate description, please consult the Diversity Style Guide and Archives for Black Lives in Philadelphia: Anti-Racist Description Resources.

The Litchfield County Court African Americans and Native Americans Collection is an artificial collection consisting of photocopies of cases involving persons of African descent and indigenous people from the Files and Papers by Subject series of Litchfield County Court records. This collection was created in order to highlight the lives and experiences of underrepresented groups in early America, and make them more easily accessible to researchers.

Collection Overview

The collection consists of records of 188 court cases involving either African Americans or Native Americans. A careful search of the Files for the Litchfield County Court discovered 165 on African Americans and 23 on Native Americans, about one third of the total that was found in Files for the New London County Court for the period up to the American Revolution. A couple of reasons exist for this vast difference in numbers. First, Litchfield County was organized much later than New London, one of Connecticut's four original counties. New London was the home of four of seven recognized tribes, was a trading center, and an area of much greater wealth. Second, minority population in the New London County region has been tracked and tabulated by Barbara Brown and James Rose in Black Roots of Southeastern Connecticut.¹ Although this valuable work does not include all of Negro or Indian background, it provides a wonderful starting point and it has proven to be of some assistance in tracking down minorities in Litchfield County. In most instances, however, identification is based upon language in the documents and knowledge of surnames or first names.² Neither surname nor first name provides an invariably reliable guide so it is possible that some minorities have been missed and some persons included that are erroneous.

In thirteen of 188 court cases, the person of African or Native American background cannot be identified even by first name. He or she is noted as "my Negro," a slave girl, or an Indian. In twenty-three lawsuits, a person with a first name is identified as a Negro, as an Indian in two other cases, and Mulatto in one. In the remaining 151 cases, a least one African American or Native American is identified by complete name.³ Thirteen surnames recur in three or more cases.⁴ A total of seventy surnames, some with more than one spelling, are represented in the records.

The Jacklin surname appears most frequently represented in the records. Seven different Jacklins are found in eighteen cases, two for debt and the remaining sixteen for more serious crimes like assault, breach of peace, keeping a bawdy house, and trespass.⁵ Ten cases concern Cuff Kingsbury of Canaan between 1808 and 1812, all involving debts against Kingsbury and the attempts of plaintiffs to secure writs of execution against him. Cyrus, Daniel, Ebenezer, Jude, Luke, Martin, Nathaniel, Pomp, Titus, and William Freeman are found in nine cases, some for debt, others for theft, and one concerning a petition to appoint a guardian for aged and incompetent Titus Freeman.⁶ Six persons with the surname Caesar are found in seven court cases.

Sixty-one of 188 cases concern debt.⁷ Litchfield County minorities were plaintiffs in only about ten of these lawsuits, half debt by book and half debt by note. The largest single category of court proceedings concern cases of crimes against person or property. They include assault (32 cases), theft (30), breach of peace (5), and breaking out of jail (1). In cases of assault, the Negro or Indian was the perpetrator in about two thirds of the cases and victim in one third. In State v. Alexander Kelson, the defendant was accused of assaulting Eunice Mawwee.⁸ Minority defendants in assault cases included Daniel K. Boham, William Cable, Prince Comyns, Adonijah Coxel, Homer Dolphin, Jack Jacklin, Pompey Lepean, John Mawwee, Zack Negro, and Jarvis Phillips. One breach of peace case, State v. Frederic Way, the defendant, "a transient Indian man," was accused of breach of the peace for threatening Jonathan Rossetter and the family of Samuel Wilson of Harwinton.⁹

In cases of theft, African Americans appeared as defendants in 27 of 30 cases, the only exceptions being two instances in which Negroes were illegally seized by whites and the case of State v. William Pratt of Salisbury. The State charged Pratt with stealing $35 from the house of George Ceasor.¹⁰ More typical, however, are such cases as State v. Prince Cummins for the theft of a dining room table and State v. Nathaniel Freeman for the theft of clothes.¹¹

Another major category of lawsuits revolves around the subject of slaves as property. The number and percentage of such cases is much lower than that for New London County due to the fact that the county was only organized one generation before the American Revolution and the weaker grip the institution of slavery had in that county. The cases may be characterized as conversion to own use (4), fraudulent contract (3), fraudulent sale (3), runaways (3), illegal enslavement (2), and trespass (2).¹² The Litchfield County Court in April 1765 heard George Catling v. Moses Willcocks, a case in which Willcocks was accused of converting a slave girl and household goods to his own use.¹³ In the 1774 fraudulent contract case of Josiah Willoughby v. Elisha Bigelow, the plaintiff accused Bigelow of lying about York Negro's age and condition. Willoughby stated that York Negro was twenty years older that he was reputed to be, was blind in one eye, and "very intemperate in the use of Speretuous Lickor." He sued to recover the purchase price of £45, the court agreed, and the defendant appealed.¹⁴ Cash Africa sued Deborah Marsh of Litchfield in 1777 for illegal enslavement. He claimed that he was unlawfully seized with force and arms and compelled to labor for the defendant for three years.¹⁵ In another case, David Buckingham v. Jonathan Prindle, the defendant was accused of persuading Jack Adolphus to run away from his master. The plaintiff claimed that Adolphus was about twenty years old and bound to service until age twenty-five, when he would be freed under terms of Connecticut's gradual emancipation law.¹⁶

Other subjects found in Litchfield County Minorities include defamation, gambling, keeping a bawdy house, and lascivious carriage. The defamation cases all included the charge of sexual intercourse with an Indian or Negro. In one such case, Henry S. Atwood v. Norman Atwood, both of Watertown, the defendant defamed and slandered the plaintiff by charging that he was "guilty of the crime of fornication or adultery with [a] Black or Negro woman," the wife of Peter Deming.¹⁷ Three cases, two from 1814 and one from 1821, accuse several Negroes accuse Harry Fitch, Polly Gorley, Violet Jacklin, Betsy Mead, and Jack Peck alias Jacklin, of running houses of ill repute.¹⁸

The records on African Americans and Native Americans from Litchfield County are relatively sparse, but they do provide some indication of the difficulties encountered by minorities in white society. They also provide some useful genealogical data on a handful of families in northwestern Connecticut.

1. Barbara W. Brown and James M. Rose, joint authors, Black Roots in Southeastern Connecticut, 1650-1900 (Detroit: Gale Research Co., 1980).
2. The court cases often identify minorities by the words Negro, mulatto, colored, or Indian.
3. Two or more African Americans or Native Americans are found in 27 lawsuits, but a maximum of two people are included in the Litchfield County Minorities database.
4. Surnames with spelling variations: Boston (3), Botsford (4), Caesar (7), Coxel (3), Freedom (3), Freeman (9), Gauson (5), Jacklin (17), Kingsbury (10), Leopen (4), Mawwee (5), Quomenor (4), and Smith (3).
5. George, Harvey, Isaac, Jack, Philip, Violet, and William Jacklin. Also included is Jack Peck, alias Jack Jacklin.
6. For the last case, see Conservators and Guardians, Box 2, folder 42.
7. Fifty-seven suits for debt, the vast majority of which a minority was plaintiff or defendant, and four concerning writs of execution to recover debt owed.
8. Dec. 1836, Box 3, folder 16.
9. Sep. 1796, Box 3, folder 6.
10. David King v. Stephen Walton, Mar. 1791, Box 1, folder 17;Simon Mitchel v. Edward Hinman, Dec. 1793, Box 1, folder 18; State v. William Pratt, Oct. 1848, Box 2, folder 37.
11. Apr. 1828, Box 2, folder 23; Oct. 1837, Box 2, folder 29.
12. Three additional conversion cases concern livestock and hay.
13. Apr. 1765, Box 1, folder 5.
14. Dec. 1774, Box 1, folder 9.
15. Sep. 1777, Box 1, folder 9.
16. Dec. 1813, Box 1, folder 49.
17. Dec. 1814, Box 2, folder 2.
18. Sep. 1814, Box 2, folder 3, Sep. 1814, Box 2, folder 4; Sep. 1821, Box 2, folder 15.

If a record of interest is found, and a reproduction of the original record is desired, you may submit a request via <a

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Oroville population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Oroville across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Oroville was 1,852, a 0% decrease year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Oroville population was 1,852, an increase of 1.20% compared to a population of 1,830 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Oroville increased by 156. In this period, the peak population was 1,852 in the year 2022. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Oroville is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Oroville population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Oroville Population by Year. You can refer the same here

AU WA S235- cons3868 400 Toodyay (Newcastle) 12. Plan of Toodyay Townsite by F.T. Gregory 1852, W. Phelps 1859/1860, by C. Evans 1861 and unsigned [scale: 4 chains to an inch, Tally No. 005855]. Further Information available from State Records Office. Series S235 - ORIGINAL PLANS - TOWNSITES Show full description