Catawba River Basin - Steven J. Coker
Subject: Catawba River Basin
From: Steven J. Coker
Date: July 01, 1998

Source: 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charleston District
Navigability Study 1977
Catawba River Basin
Report No. 16 of 18

Section 4 - Interstate Commerce

Past

One of the first white men to visit the Catawba River basin was the Englishman,
John Lawson, who traveled the region in 1700. However, a Pennsylvanian named
John Lederer may have seen the region some thirty years previously, and various
Spanish expeditions may also have penetrated to the Catawba even before that.
(11) The Charleston-based "Carolina traders" lost no time in establishing
commercial ties with the several tribes who lived along the banks of the
Catawba. As with other regions of North and South Carolina, various groups of
European settlers, principally English and Scotch-Irish, arrived in the Catawba
basin in the early and mid-18th Century to establish permanent homes.

These settlers could not have enjoyed a free, uninterrupted use of the Catawba
to move surplus crops down to the coast; both the Catawba and its lower stretch,
the Wateree, were blocked at several points by rock ledges which prevented
uninterrupted navigation. One historical source is sure that the products which
were moved out of the region and sent to Charleston went by wagon, not by water.
(12) Not until 1787 did the General Assembly of South Carolina move to open the
navigation of the Catawba River by establishing a company for that purpose. (13)
While other rivers received more attention and funds from the state of South
Carolina, it was hoped that the Catawba project would nonetheless prove
successful. In 1788, North Carolina also moved by passing "An Act to establish a
company for opening the Navigation of the Catawba Rivers," from the South
Carolina line (approximately R.M. 154) "as far up both branches of the Catawba
Rivers as may be found practicable, by means of canals, dams, and locks." (14)
Eight years later, the North Carolina General Assembly repealed its 1788 act
because "the Company" had failed to live up to the terms of the act, having
removed no obstructions and constructed no dams, locks, canals, or done anything
to make the Catawba navigable. (15)

Such failure notwithstanding, in 1801 North Carolina passed still another "Act
to improve the Navigation of the Catawba River, from the South Carolina line, as
far up as the same may be practicable." (16) This new company, so vested and
styled the "North Carolina Catawba Company," could announce by 1808 that It had
"fully complied with the regulations of the act," and had made considerable
progress "in rendering said river navigable." (17) Still other acts for
navigational Improvement followed in 1816 and in 1849. (18) Nearly fifty years
later, an act of 1897 sought "to keep the Catawba River open as a highway for
floatage," and noted that "certain portions of the Catawba River and Johns River
are floatable streams and navigable highways for the purpose of floatage." (19)

These various acts indicate the efforts of both Carolinas to create a system of
inland navigation, a project which enjoyed its prosperity in the first three
decades of the 19th Century. Ulrich B. Phillips, a historian, noted in 1824 that
some $1,780 was spent on the Catawba Canal. (20) Yet the job of making the
Catawba a navigable stream could not have been an easy one. When South
Carolina's Civil and Military Engineer, John Wilson, examined the stream in
1818, he noted that "The navigation of the Catawba River, above Wateree Creek,
is obstructed by rapids and falls, and will require extensive works to render it
navigable." He also indicated that "The importance of this river to the trade of
the interior will warrant any expense," and that the "state. of North Carolina
has improved the navigation above the boundary line in the expectation that the
works below the line would be carried on with corresponding spirit." (21)

In that "corresponding spirit," South Carolina completed, in 1823, the Catawba
Canal. While "boats carrying 40 bales of cotton" apparently plied the river, it
was later reported that the Catawba Canal "Was little used in consequence of the
length of portage at Rocky Mount." (22) But by 1827, the South Carolina General
Assembly's committee on internal improvements could announce that the
Catawba-Wateree River was navigable "from Camden to the North Carolina line"
(R.M. 154). (23) This statement may not have been completely in line with the
facts; soon the legislature grew weary of expensive devices to effect a system
of navigation which, in fact and all too often, proved non-navigable. Although
Robert Mills and other promoters of the inland navigation scheme had believed
that a navigable watercourse could be made of the Catawba all the way from
Morganton, N. C. (R.M. 257) down to Charleston, S. C., "the great trade ...
predicted ... [had] failed to develop." (24) By 1836, the various canals on the
Catawba were in poor condition, and navigation may have ceased by about 1840.

S. T. Albert, a Civil Engineer working for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
examined the Catawba thirty-five years later. The act of March 3, 1875 had
appropriated funds for Albert's examination. He reported that "The natural
obstructions of the river between Old Fort and the [North Carolina-South
Carolina] State line are so formidable, that it cannot be navigated in its
present unimproved condition." His report further indicated that the Catawba's
"trade is consequently nothing, and any future trade which is contingent on its
improvement must be confined to timber, iron ore, and agricultural products."
(25)

Writing in 1876, Albert was altogether pessimistic about the river's potential
for improvement, and was not even sure that the Catawba could be adapted to log
rafting and barges. The "Resources of trade," he noted, "are undeveloped." (26)
Twelve years later, these views were echoed by Captain W. H. Bixby, Corps of
Engineers, who examined the Catawba River and submitted an unfavorable report on
the river's potential development for navigation. (27)

In various reports compiled around the end of the 19th Century and in the first
two decades of the 20th Century, the Catawba-Wateree was viewed as being
navigable as far up as Camden, S. C. (28) Waterborne Commerce of the United
States, 1953 contained no listing of interstate commerce for the Catawba, nor
did the volume for the year 1975.

Commencing in the second decade of the 20th Century, Duke Power Company
constructed a series of dams and lakes on the Catawba River for the production
of hydroelectric power. These lakes included Lake Allisons, near Statesville, N.
C., and Lake Catawba and Lake James, built in 1919. Other lakes were Lookout
Shoals, constructed in 1915; Mountain Island Lake, built in 1923; and Lakes
Hickory and Rhodhiss, built in 1928 and 1924, respectively. (29)

Present

The Catawba River Is not currently being used for purposes of waterborne
interstate commerce. (30)

During the period 1823 to about 1838, the Catawba River seems to have been
navigable from Camden, S.- C. (on the Wateree) to Morganton, N. C., if the
statements of some of the proponents of inland navigation are to be believed.
The period when the Catawba River was navigable was short -- the difficulty of
keeping the canals and channels maintained, and the advent of railway
transportation, led to the eventual abandonment of the river as an artery for
moving commodities.

In 1965, the Catawba was described as follows: "Trib. of Wateree River.
Non-navigable." (31)


Future Potential 

Comprehensive analysis of the regional economics (income, education, employment,
community facilities, transportation systems, and similar factors), which would
indicate growth patterns and the services needed to sustain various types of
industrial and commercial activities, is beyond the scope of this study. Thus,
the potential use of the Catawba River and its tributaries for interstate
commerce in future years Is difficult to predict.

The river has the potential to be utilized for interstate shipment of goods
since it flows through two states and is also connected with the Santee-Cooper
River system. However, future potential interstate commerce is not anticipated
to be significant due in part to heavy dependence by industrial and commercial
establishments on other forms of transportation including the Interstate highway
system, railroads, and air transport, as well as physical limitations imposed by
the river channel and man-made structures crossing the river.

[snipped]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cited References:

1. Santee River Basin Water and Land Resources, North and South Carolina, United
States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Forest Service and
Soil Conservation Service, September, 1973.

2. Eastern United States, 1:250,000 scale, U. S. Geological Survey contour map.

3. Water Resources Data for South Carolina 1975, Water Data Report 75-1, U. S.
Geological Survey, 1976.

4. Summary Report, Navigability Study, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston
District, by Stanley Consultants, 1977.

5. Water Resources Data for North Carolina Water Year 1975, Water Data Report N.
C. 75-1, U. S. Geological Survey, Raleigh, North Carolina, 1976.

6. Legal Documentation for Navigability Study 1977 and Determination of
Navigability of Catawba River, North Carolina/South Carolina 1975, U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Charleston District, Charleston, South Carolina.

7. South Carolina Streamflow Characteristics Low-Flow Frequency and Flow
Duration, U. S. Geological Survey, Columbia, South Carolina, 1967.

8. Thomas, N. 0., Summaries of Streamflow Records, State of North Carolina,
Department of Natural and Economic Resources, Office of Water and Air Resources,
Raleigh, North Carolina, 1973.

9. Project Maps Charleston District 1975, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office
of the District Engineer, Charleston, South Carolina, 1975.

10. Extract Report of the Charleston, S. C. District, Annual Report of the Chief
of Engineers on Civil Works Activities, U. S. Department of the Army, USGPO,
Washington, D. C., 1974, pp. 7-16.

11. Savage, Henry, River of the Carolinas: The Santee, UNC Press, Chapel Hill,
1968, pp. 58-67.

12. Preslar, Charles J., A History of Catawba County, Rowan Printing Co.,
Salisbury, 1954, p. 61.

13. McCord, David J., The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, A. S. Johnston,
Columbia, 1840, Vol. VII, P. 549.

14. N. C. General Assembly, Acts and Statutes of the General Assembly of North
Carolina, Chap. XVI, pp. 635-637.

15. Ibid., Chap. XXXII, P. 32.

16. Ibid., Chap. LXIII, p. 23.

17. Ibid., Chap. XXXIV, P. 19.

18. Ibid., Chap. XXV, p. 18; Chap. CXCV, p. 356.

19. Ibid., Chap. 388, pp. 568-569.

20. Phillips, Ulrich B., A History of Transportation in the Eastern Cotton Belt
to 1860 Columbia University Press, New York, 1908, P. 91.

21. Kohn, David and Glenn, Bess eds., Internal Improvement In South Carolina
1817-1828, "Report of the Civil and Military Engineer of South Carolina (1818)",
USGPO, Washington, 1938, p. A12.

22. Ibid., pp. 289, 344.

23. Hollis, Daniel W., "Costly Delusion: Inland Navigation In the South Carolina
Piedmont," Proceedings of the S. C. Historical Association, 1968, p. 37.

24. Ibid., p. 40.

25. U. S. War Department, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army,
1876, Pt. I, pp. 367-368, 372.

26. Ibid., pp. 373, 375.

27. U. S. War Department, Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army,
1888, Pt. I, p. 958.

28. U. S. Congress, House, Wateree River, South Carolina H. Doc. No. 185, 58th
Cong., 2d Sess., 1903, pp. 6-7; Board of Trade of Georgetown, S. C., The Rivers
of South and North Carolina entering Winyah Bay, SO. CA., (Georgetown: Edward
Perry, 1896), no page numbers; see various subsections.

29. U. S. Department of the Interior, Water Resources Investigations in North
Carolina, 1965 (Washington: USGPO, 1965), p. 7.

30. U. S. Department of the Army, Waterborne Commerce of the United States, 1975
Pt. I, Waterways and Harbors: Atlantic Coast, p. 124.

31. Incomplete List of Navigable Waters RCS ENGCW-ON (OT), U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Charleston, South Carolina, 1965.

Other Background Information: 

Blythe, LeGette, Hornet's Nest: The Story of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County,
McNally of Charlotte, Charlotte, 1961.

Catawba River, Silver Creek and Bailey Fork, Flood Plain Information, Morganton,
N. C., U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston District, Charleston, South
Carolina, January, 1970.

Catawba River and Mill Creek, Flood Plain Information, McDowell County, N. C.,
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston District, Charleston, South Carolina,
June, 1971.

Cumming, William P., North Carolina in Maps, State Department of Archives and
History, Raleigh, 1966.

Laney, F. B., Bibliography of North Carolina Geology, Mineralogy and Geography:
N. C. Geological and Economic Survey Bulletin 18, E. M. Uzzell, Raleigh, 1909.

McMaster, F. Hugh, History of Fairfield County, South Carolina, The State
Commercial Printing Co., Columbia, 1946. 

N. C. Governor's Office Records, Journal of the Commissioners of Navigation,
1819, State Archives, Raleigh, 1819.

S. C. Water Resources Commission, A Reconnaissance Survey of Streams in the
South Carolina Coastal Plain S. C. Water Resources Commission, Columbia, 1971.

Wittkowsky, G. H. and J. L. Moselby, Kershaw County: Economic and Social
Bulletin No. 120, USC Press, Columbia, 1923.

==== SCROOTS Mailing List ====





Go To:  #,  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  G,  H,  I,  J,  K,  L,  M,  N,  O,  P,  Q,  R,  S,  T,  U,  V,  W,  X,  Y,  Z,  Main