From "Crossing the Canal" (2009, www.x-communication.org)

Minnesota Point Lighthouse

Standing fifty feet tall when built in 1858 and located at the end of Minnesota Point, one of Lake Superior's first lighthouses was intended to help mariners navigate the Superior Entry. R. H. Barrett, its first keeper, lived with his family in a simple cottage built of the same red Ohio brick German stonemason Adam Dopp used to build the tower. 

Both buildings were later whitewashed in limestone. When the fog became thick, Barrett used his own lungs to blow a warning through a logging camp dinner horn. Local residents called it "Barrett's Cow." 

The lighthouse constantly needed repairs; it leaked, and plaster fell off in chunks. The ever-changing sand bar also created a problem: the location of the natural entry shifted; within a year of the tower's construction, it no longer stood close to the water (today it is about a half mile away). By 1885 most ship traffic passed through Duluth's canal, so on August 6 of that year the government discontinued the lighthouse's use.

In 1889 a wooden pierhead beacon was built on the north timber pier under construction in the Superior Entry and it was fitted with the lens from the Minnesota Point light. That light was destroyed in the Mataafa Storm of 1905.

While the keeper's house was torn down long ago, the lighthouse — what's left of it — still stands. It's now barely thirty feet high and is protected by a fence. The tower still contains the "zero" marker used for all surveys mapping Lake Superior — work undertaken by pioneer George Stuntz, the first non-native to settle on Minnesota Point.

A couple of questions that I hope you will research because I'm busy eating ice cream:

1. How long has this area been classified as an SNA area?

2. If longer than three days, why was the cabin just now removed?

3. Could the removal have anything to do with the effort to classify the area as  "protected," and if so, would this have anything to do with the Sky Harbor airport/tree removal issue?

Fantastic history as always on this great site.

Here is a link to the previous PDD thread about this cabin, giving specific history of it.

Park Point Park cabin?

Wow. So is the entire point beyond the airport an SNA now, or just a chunk of the forest? I can't tell from the map. And, does anyone know when it got this designation?

SNA rules are pretty strict, unless special exceptions were made (?), it is illegal to walk your dog, ride your bike, collect rocks/flowers/ect, or maintain any type of trails on SNA land.  

Sounds like an irregular shaped parcel, can't tell if the SNA boundaries  run lakeshore to bayside... and how that would effect recreational through-travel to the rest of the point. Anyone privy?

via MN DNR website
[img]http://maps.dnr.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/mapserv54?map.imagetype=aggpng24&mode=map&map=/usr/local/mapserver/apps/mr/landview/landview2.map&mapsize=430%20370&mapext=573026.36718751%205173640.2587886%20574653.80859376%205174832.6416011&layers=roads+bdry_snapy3+img_fsa01bim4[/img]

SNAs are not "sealed off," the government is not Communist, and this is nothing "new."

Otherwise:

Two pull quotes from the DNR site:

"Please note: SNAs are open to the public for nature observation and education, but are not meant for intensive recreational activities."

"Site development varies widely; signage and parking facilities may or may not exist at individual sites. Some now have interpretive kiosks to help visitors identify key features and processes. Public conveniences, including trails, are the exception."



I'm not sure what they mean by the last sentence as it does not track well with the rest of the paragraph. I would hazard it means trails are allowed. The site also says you can ski, snowshoe or walk. So no bikes, and yes, no dogs (unless there is an exception granted). Aside from the bikes and dogs the only real change seems to be the removal of the cabin, which I am guessing while many consider it "historic" had no official recognition or designation as such? The removal seemed to be done pretty roughly which is disappointing, given the sandy soil I'm not sure if anything too heavy could have gotten back there to lift it.

Hey Anti Something, you should tell us about how Obama isn't even an American citizen...I'm sure that's your next argument.

"Exception" means an exception to the general rule.  It does not mean "rare."

Four Justices on the Supreme Court does not constitute a majority.

Brett,

This article explains this complicated matter with regard to having four justices decide a case, by default, assuming there is a tie, or by four if that is a majority, assuming two justices are unavailable on the court.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130205734