Author Archives: mmaddison

Energy on the Wilford VanWart Farm and Hampstead, Queens County, New Brunswick

Posted on by
Figure 1a. Wilford VanWart’s barn in Hampstead, New Brunswick, Canada with the St. John River in the distance. This photograph, and those that follow, are used with permission of Margot Stafford, a descendant of Wilford VanWart.
Figure 1b. Wilford VanWart.

The VanWart Farm in New Brunswick’s Queens County is an example of a mixed farm with an emphasis on dairy, fodder, and other riverine resources found in the Acadian Forest agroecosystem. The VanWart family farm was 260 acres in size, or 105.2 hectares, and was situated on the St. John River which provided the possibility of riverine transportation for products both arriving at and leaving the farm. The VanWart farm was greater than twice the size of the average farm in the Hampstead census subdivision (CSD), the average size being 46.1 ha. Wilford VanWart (b. 1849/d. 1920) was 22 years old in 1871.[1] His father, Jacob VanWart, had died in 1861.[2] Therefore, in 1871, the VanWart family farm was run by Wilford’s mother Catherine, his uncle John VanWart (his father’s younger brother) plus Wilfred and his siblings–his older brother Abner who was 31 in 1871, and his sisters Matilda, age 26, Bethiah, age 23, and Eliza, age 14.[3] The family also had a hired farm labourer in 1871, John G. Holy, who was the same age as Abner, 31. Abner died in 1877 at the age of 37, leaving Wilford to inherit the farm.[4] By 1881, Wilford’s uncle John and his mother Catherine were still living with the family, but his three sisters were not. Wilford married Elvira Jane Fox of Lower Gagetown.[5] When the census was taken in 1881, the couple had two children, Arthur, aged one, and Mabel, just five months old.[6] Ten years later, in 1891, Wilford was the head of the household, and he and Jane had five children, one son, Jacob, and four daughters, Mabel, Nellie, Ida, and Jesse.[7]

Figure 1b. Google Map of Hampstead, Queens County, New Brunswick.

Figure 1c. Clip of Crown Grant Reference Map showing location of Wilford VanWart’s farm, with thanks to Margot Stafford’s father Brian Till for noting the location. Brian points out that Wilford VanWart also had the first section on Long Island that he hayed in summer, storing the hay in a barn on the island until winter when the St. John River froze. When the river ice was thick enough to support horses and sleighs, VanWart was able to retrieve his hay from the island and transport it to the main farm. Clip of Crown Grant Reference Map provided by Service New Brunswick. Note: this map contains information licensed under the Open Government License, New Brunswick. Crown Grant Reference Map. 1inch: 10 chains: 660 feet. Fredericton, N. B.: GeoNB, 1964, https://geonb.snb.ca/GRP/index.html.

Farm Energy Funds*

Wilford VanWart’s family farm was over 57 percent cleared in 1871, meaning it was significantly more advanced than the average farm in Hampstead (38 percent cleared) and the rest of New Brunswick (31 percent cleared). The family also accessed the first section on Long Island in the St. John River which was used primarily for hay (Figure 1c). Lush marshland islands produced more hay per ha than did upland hay.[8] The farm had more land in pasture and hay than did the average farm in the Hampstead CSD. VanWart had 16.2 ha in pasture and 32.4 ha in hay, but for the average farm in Hampstead it was 10.7 ha and 8.9 ha respectively. This points to the VanWart farm being fodder intensive but, in spite of VanWart’s focus on feed for his animals, his farm had a feed and litter deficit, which was also the case for the greater Hampstead region. In order to meet the demand for feed and litter, VanWart and, indeed, many of his neighbours, must have imported hay from hay producing regions along the Bay of Fundy such as the Tantramar Marshes. At the time, these marshlands were farmed to meet the demands of a hay economy. Hay from the area was transported by ship and train to lumber camps, mines, farms, cities in Maritime Canada, and cities on the eastern seaboard of the United States.[9] Because the VanWart farm was situated on the St. John River, it may be that hay was delivered directly to the farm by ship. In his diary, kept almost 40 years later, 1907-1909, Wilford mentioned a wharf in Hampstead where riverboats stopped daily. He also mentioned purchasing feed by the bag from a Hampstead merchant and sending pork and other products to the village to sell.[10] 

Figure 2a. Area Visualization of Wilford VanWart’s farm in 1871, with more than half under cultivation or pasture. Additionally, the VanWart farm had more land in hay than in pasture.
Figure 2b. Area Visualization of all the farms in Hampstead CSD, Queens, New Brunswick. Approximately one-third of the farmland is under cultivation or in pasture, and there is more pasture than hay, which is a contrast to the VanWart farm.

The livestock intensity for VanWart’s farm was 26.2 livestock units per km2, and the grazing intensity was 1.34 ruminant units per ha of pasture. This was higher than the greater Hampstead region which was 10.0 livestock units per km2 and .73 ruminants units per ha of pasture. Therefore, VanWart’s livestock and grazing intensity was approximately twice that of the greater Hampstead region. Whereas, the VanWart farm had no residues from its fodder crops and pasture, the greater Hampstead region as a whole had 15,408,866 MJ of residues. The VanWart farm had 20 cords of firewood on hand, in 1871. In contrast, the average amount of firewood on a farm in Hampstead was 14 cords, in 1871.

Figure 3a and 3b. Comparison of Fodder Crops and Pasture for the VanWart farm and the Hampstead CSD. Wilford VanWart had a much greater portion of his land in hay than was the case for the Hampstead CSD.

Farm Energy Flows*

In 1871, the VanWart farm produced 1000 bu potatoes, 196 bu oats, 170 bu buckwheat, 30 bu apples, five bu corn, four bu of hops, and two bu each of peas, beans, and turnips. The farm had one hive of bees. The greater Hampstead region produced the same crops, plus some farmers grew rye, Mangel-wurtzel, carrots, and drew maple sugar from the bush. Farmers in the Hampstead CSD reported 138 hives of bees.

Figures 4a and 4b. Comparison of Crop Energy Flows between the VanWart farm and the Hampstead CSD.  The VanWart farm and the Hampstead CSD show a similar pattern in the crops grown; however, the VanWart farm had a greater emphasis on grain residues for litter, oats, and potatoes, and a lesser emphasis on buckwheat.

In 1871, VanWart reported having two horses over three years old, two colts or fillies, two oxen, 12 other horned cattle, 12 swine, 14 milk cows,19 sheep, and one beehive. He slaughtered two cattle, 12 swine, and 16 sheep. In contrast, the average farm had 1.4 horses over the age of three, .3 colts or fillies, .8 oxen, 5.3 milk cows, 3.3 other horned cattle, 9 sheep, 3.8 swine, and .65 of a beehive, and the average farm slaughtered 1.2 cattle, 3.7 sheep, and 3.8 swine. VanWart had 600 pounds of butter, 1,000 pounds of cheese, 14 pounds of honey, 102 pounds of wool, and 90 yards of cloth, whereas the average farm had 349 pounds of butter, 207 pounds of cheese, 6.9 pounds of honey, and 39.6 pounds of wool. Notable here is the VanWart farm’s dairy production: in energetic terms, the average farm in the Hampstead CSD produced about one-third of what the VanWart farm produced. Hampstead farmers produced 791,210 MJ from their butter and cheese, for an average of 4,100 MJ per farm; in contrast, the VanWart farm produced 12,320 MJ from butter and cheese. The labour of the women on the VanWart farm, Wilford’s mother Catherine, and his three sisters, Matilda, Bethiah, and Eliza, must have contributed greatly to the VanWart family’s prosperity. No doubt, by applying their labour to various farm tasks, they were able to increase the farm’s output. It is probable that there would have been a wharf in Hampstead where the VanWart farm productions would have been taken, loaded on ships, and sold in various markets, perhaps Fredericton, St. John, or Halifax.[11]

Figures 5a and 5b. Comparison of Livestock Flows between the VanWart farm and the Hampstead CSD.

Conclusion

Wilford VanWart’s farm was very prosperous compared to the average farm in the Hampstead CSD. Although he used more of his available land as hay and pasture than did the average farm in Hampstead CSD, he still had a feed and litter deficit. He must have met his livestock’s feed and litter requirements by importing hay, perhaps from the hay-rich Tantramar Marshes. Additionally, the VanWart farm had abundant available labour, divided evenly by gender: four men and four women. Their combined labour made the farm a success.

Margot Stafford keeps a Twitter account in the name of Wilford VanWart @VanWartWilford where she regularly posts his diary entries from over a century ago.

Figure 6a. The next generation: Nase VanWart (Wilford’s son) hauling hay from Long Island over the ice.
Figure 6b. Julia (Nase VanWart’s wife and Wilford’s daughter-in-law) feeding chickens on the VanWart Farm.

< Previous Profile (Johnson)

Next Profile (Russell) >

* For an explanation of terms in this profile, see the farm energy profiles project home page.

[1] “Wilford Vanwart,,” 1871 Census of Canada, RG31, C-10380, Library and Archives Canada (LAC), Ottawa.

[2] “Jacob VanWart,” Ancestry Family Trees, Ancestry.ca.

[3] “VanWart,” 1871, LAC.

[4] “Abner VanWart,” grave marker, Central Hampstead Baptist Cemetery, Hampstead, Queens, New Brunswick, Canada, FindaGrave.com.

[5] “Ida Lottie VanWart,” New Brunswick, Canada, Births and Late Registrations, 1810-1906, s.v.”Ida Lottie Vanwart,” Ancestry.ca.

[6] Wilford VanWart,” 1881 Census of Canada, RG31, C-13181, LAC.

[7] Wilford VanWart,” 1891 Census of Canada, RG31, T-6302, LAC.The couple’s first born son Arthur is not recorded in the 1891 Canada Census. He must have passed sometime after the 1881 census was taken.

[8] Jason Hall, “River of  Three Peoples: An Environmental and Cultural History of the Wәlastәw / Riviere St. Jean / St. John River, c. 1550 – 1850” (PhD diss., University of New Brunswick, 2015), 300-301.

[9] Robert Summerby-Murray, “‘Beneath the Marshes There’: Historical Maps, Dykes, and the Aboiteaux of Tantramar” in Underground New Brunswick: Stories of Archaeology, eds. Peter Erickson and Jonathan Fowler, (Halifax: Nimbus Publishing, 2013), 78.

[10] Margot Stafford, email message to the author, September 3, 2021. Stafford, a descendant of Wilford VanWart, keeps a Twitter account in which she regularly tweets Wilford’s diary entries (@VanwartWilford).

[11] Margot Stafford, email message to the author, September 3, 2021. Although there is no certainty if the VanWart farm had its own dock, or if there was a Hampstead wharf in 1871, by 1907-1909 when Wilford VanWart regularly kept a diary, there was definitely a wharf in Hampstead. The riverboats stopped there daily, and Wilford VanWart often mentioned in his diary that he sent farm productions by riverboat to town to sell.

Energy on the Andrew Hay Johnson Farm and Falmouth, Hants County, Nova Scotia

Posted on by
Figure 1a. Unloading barrels of apples, Falmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada, ca. 1929. Used with permission. Canada Science and Technology Museum, Image No.: CN000789.

The Johnson Farm in Nova Scotia’s Hants County is an example of an organic intensive energy strategy in a Maritime horticultural agroecosystem. Andrew Hay Johnson (b. 1836/ d. 1914) reported owning and working a small 13-acre farm, in 1871; however, schedule 3 of the census notes that he also had 161.9 ha elsewhere in the Dominion of Canada, bringing his total amount of land to 167.9 ha.[1] Born in nearby Wolfville, he was the youngest child of William Johnson and Hannah Pettingell.[2] Johnson was situated on his Falmouth farm with three older women, Sophia Johnson, probably an aunt or cousin, Hannah Lantz, a servant, and his elderly mother. An active member of the Nova Scotia Fruit Growers’ Association, Johnson was an advocate for the advancement of women in horticulture.[3] The Association’s prize lists show that he was a frequent winner for apples at local and provincial fairs.[4] In 1876, he married Oliva Pettingell Church of Falmouth. She was also active in the Association, especially in the advancement of women in horticulture. The couple had one child, a daughter Edith, born in 1877.[5]

Figure 1b. Google Map of Falmouth, Hants, Nova Scotia.

Figure 1c. Frederick B. Roe. Atlas of the Maritime Provinces of the Dominion of Canada, with Historical and Geological Descriptions. St. John, N. B., and Halifax, N. S.: Roe Brothers, 1879,  https://www.islandimagined.ca/islandora/object/imagined%3A208724.

Farm Energy Funds*

In 1871, all 13 acres, or 5.3 hectares, of Johnson’s farm were cleared: 1.2 ha were in pasture, 1.8 ha were in cropland, 2 ha were designated garden or orchard, and .2 ha were in buildings and lanes. Johnson’s 2 ha of garden or orchard did double duty, producing fruit and hay. His reported five tons of hay were cut in the garden. His farm was diminutive when compared to the Falmouth CSD’s 6,879 ha. The Falmouth CSD was less than half occupied (3,295 ha), leaving the remaining land (3,584 ha) in woodland. Although Johnson reported having 12 cords of firewood and 28 cubic feet of sawn timber on hand, he did not have a woodlot on his 5.3 ha, so the wood must have come from his other land.

Figure 2a. Area Visualization for the Andrew Hay Johnson farm, 1871. The coloured rectangle represents Andrew Hay Johnson’s 5.3 ha, and the large grey polygon that engulfs that rectangle represents the 161.9 ha that was outside the Falmouth Census Subdivision. His 5.3 ha parcel was one hundred percent improved, and most of that land (2 ha) was in gardens or orchards. He had a small pasture (1.2 ha) and a small area for crops (1.8 ha).  We suggest that the much larger 161.9 ha was partially improved and that this is where about half of Johnson’s 230 bushels of apples were grown and where his 12 cords of wood and 28 cubic feet of sawn timber originated.
Figure 2b. Area Visualization for the Falmouth CSD, 1871. Note the 1,267.9 ha pastureland in the Falmouth CSD, some of which may have been available to Johnson’s livestock in order to relieve the pressure on his own 1.2 ha of pastureland. Although Johnson did not have salt marsh as part of his holding, the Falmouth CSD reported 467.41 ha of salt marsh, which was 14.19 percent of the CSD’s reported farmland.

That same year, 1871, Johnson reported having one horse and one colt or filly, two working oxen, two milk cows, one steer or heifer, four sheep, and no beehives. These figures diverge significantly from the average farm in the Falmouth CSD which had 1.1 horses over the age of three, .3 colts of fillies, .6 oxen, 1.9 milk cows, 2.5 other horned cattle, 5.3 sheep, 1.4 swine. and .83 of a beehive. Johnson slaughtered two cattle and four sheep. The average farm in the CSD, however, slaughtered 1.5 cattle, three sheep, and 1.4 swine. Johnson had 300 pounds of butter and 16 pounds of wool, but the average farm had 143.5 pounds of butter, 2.7 pounds of cheese, 18.6 pounds of wool, plus 6.7 pounds of honey, 13.2 yards of homemade flannel, and .9 of a yard of homemade linen. Johnson had an extremely high livestock density of 130.3 livestock units per km2 (LU/km2) and a grazing intensity of 4.2 ruminant units per hectare (LUr/ha) of pasture, if the animals were only pastured on his 5.3 ha. If his larger 167.1 ha is taken into consideration, then his LU/km2 drops to 4.1, but his LUr/ha remains at 4.2, because we do not know if there is more available pasture on the 161.9 ha. The Falmouth CSD’s livestock intensity and grazing intensity is 13.5 and .54 respectively.

Figure 3a and 3b. Fodder Crops and Pasture charts for the Andrew Hay Johnson farm and the Falmouth CSD.

Johnson had a feed deficit of 227,464 MJ and a litter deficit of 74,967 MJ. Thus, he would have relied heavily on imported biomass and on his residues, likely from his corn. Johnson may have also rented pasture from neighbouring farms to ease the pressure on his own 1.2 ha of pasture.

Farm Energy Flows*

A horticultural farm focused on dairy production as well as fruit and vegetables, the Johnson farm produced three bushels of peas, 15 bushels of barley, and 20 bushels of corn, in 1871. There were also root crops: 150 bushels of mangel wurzel,100 bushels of carrots, 200 bushels of turnips, and 300 bushels of potatoes. The orchard produced 230 bushels of apples and 12 bushels of “other” fruit, probably plums and pears. Johnson’s large amount of apples indicates that he was emerging as a significant orchardist in the Falmouth region by 1871. The Falmouth CSD reported 5,448 bu of apples, grown on 83 ha of gardens or orchards, or 65 bu of apples per ha. Johnson’s two ha of gardens or orchards were either producing 115 bu of apples per ha, or he was also growing apples on his additional 161.9 ha, and he reported them along with his other farm products on the 1871 census. Most probably, about half of Johnson’s apples came from his 2 ha of gardens or orchards, with the remainder coming from his other land. Either way, Johnson was producing seven times the amount of apples as the average farm in Falmouth (33 bu). The Johnson farm reinvested 62 percent of its grain and root crop biomass as feed and litter, which was about three-quarters of the 82.1 percent reinvested by farms in the Falmouth CSD.

Figure 4a and 4b. Principal Grain Crops charts for the Andrew Hay Johnson farm and the Falmouth CSD. Note that the Johnson farm produced 3,089 Mj or 39.8 percent of the total 7,753Mj of the carrot crop produced by the Falmouth CSD.

Because Johnson had few ruminant livestock and focused on growing foods for human consumption, his farm reused less biomass than other farms in the Falmouth region that mostly grew crops to feed livestock. Johnson’s farm produced 24,521 MJ or 2.45 GJ from all his crops, including residuals, but excluding hay and apples. Additionally, his farm produced 15,853 MJ from animal products, including beef from two slaughtered cattle, mutton from four slaughtered sheep, and 300 pounds of butter. Johnson’s garden produced at least 1,730 MJ from fruit crops, and his hay produced an additional 81,647 MJ, for a total of 83,377 MJ. Given that Johnson’s garden or orchard was only 2 hectares, at 83 GJ/ha it was a highly productive environment.

Figure 5a and 5b. Livestock and Barnyard Produce charts for the Andrew Hay Johnson farm and the Falmouth CSD. Although the Johnson farm and the greater Falmouth region had similar profiles in regard to Livestock and Barnyard Produce, the Johnson farm had a greater emphasis on dairy production than was the average for the greater Falmouth region.

The Livestock and Barnyard Produce for both the Johnson farm and the Falmouth CSD were similar with milk, butter, and slaughtered cattle being the biggest sources of energy. However, the Johnson farm derived more energy from butter than cattle, which was reversed for the Falmouth CSD.

Conclusion

Johnson was a significant orchardist. With 230 bushels of apples, he was seven times more productive than the average apple grower in Falmouth (33 bushels). However, the apples on this large and relatively specialized fruit operation represented a small share of the total energy balance, smaller than some of his feed crops and much less than the energy in fodder crops. In fact, even if we assume that Johnson planted his potato, carrot, and turnip crops in his garden for mainly human consumption, those 8 acres (3.2 ha) of small but carefully cultivated orchards and pastures yielded 12,547 MJ of produce for humans and 300,000 MJ of fodder for his small herd. Moreover, his animals consumed 7,457 MJ of corn and peas. They also used 9,320 MJ worth of barley residues for litter, and they consumed 205,422 MJ of residues from these and other crops as a supplement to their other feeds.

By the 1880s, Nova Scotia fruit growers had stepped into the global market and were shipping their productions to London, UK. In 1883, Johnson travelled to Britain to look into reports of damaged fruit arriving in London from Nova Scotia. He noted that the origin of the problem was two-fold: improper packaging of the fruit and rough handling of the apple barrels on Halifax and London docks.[6] Given that Johnson’s farm included livestock and cropland in addition to his garden and fruit trees, his farm economy may have been based on combined sales of apples and other fruits on the global market and production for his home and for local markets.

Figure 6. View from Pearson’s Farm – now Cedar Street – Hantsport, N. S., ca. 1895. This farm was in the same area as Johnson’s. Photographer A.E. Cornwall. Used with permission. Nova Scotia Archives 1984-497 number 133 /  negative: N-2707.

< Previous Profile (Woodworth)

Next Profile (VanWart) >

* For an explanation of terms in this profile, see the farm energy profiles project home page.

[1] “A.H. Johnson,” 1871 Census of Canada, RG31, C-10540, 566433, Library and Archives Canada (LAC), Ottawa.

[2] Shirley B. Elliott, “Johnson, Andrew Hay,” DCB Online XIV, accessed June 17, 2021, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/johnson_andrew_hay_14E.html. Elliot notes that Johnson’s larger acreage was in the Town of Falmouth.

[3] Julian Gwyn, Comfort Me with Apples: The Nova Scotia Fruit Growers’ Association, 1863-2013 (Berwick, NS: Lupin Press, 2014), 206. Gwyn also points out that prospects for apple production improved only in the late 1850s with the opening of a rail line from Halifax to Windsor. Prior to this apples had been of “very little consequence” and were not reported in the 1851 and 1861 censuses (Gwyn, 35-36). Therefore, in 1871, apple production in Nova Scotia was still a developing industry. Johnson’s farm, located across the Avon River from Windsor, was well situated to take advantage of both water transport and the rail line to Halifax, thereby securing two ways to get the farm’s apples and other products to market.

[4] Elliot, “Johnson,” DCB Online.

[5]  Edmund James Cleveland, The Genealogy of the Cleveland and Cleaveland Families. (Hartford, Conn.: Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., 1899), 1:1173, accessed June 17, 2021, http://www.books.google.com.

[6] Elliot, “Johnson,” DCB Online.