Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 3 comments Add your own | iPod friendly | Bookmark this Facebook bookmark del.icio.us bookmark StumbleUpon bookmark Digg bookmark What is this?

Fort Juelson becomes Underwood endeavor

Published 09:55 a.m., March 3, 2009

As president of the Friends of Fort Juelson, Cliff Knutson knows a lot about the former fort site two miles east of Underwood that dates back to 1876. He not only puts in a lot of time to help preserve the site, but he also has another goal — to ensure that Underwood as a whole has a big part in the preservation of the site.

To that end, the other three officers on the Friends of Fort Juelson board of directors are from Underwood. They include Ron Shebeck, vice president; Janice Weniger, secretary; and Virgil Martinson, treasurer.

“We, Friends of Fort Juelson, also plan to be a big part of the annual Underwood Harvest festival later this year,” Knutson said. “This is the perfect opportunity to get more community involvement.”

People driving about two miles east of Underwood, along Highway 210, can see a flagpole atop a hill on the north side of the highway at the Fort Juelson site. An informational sign already is in place, at a temporary location on a road to the north of Highway 210 and just west of the fort site.

“While the Indian scare of 1876 occurred in the matrix of General Custer's annihilation at the Little Big Horn of Montana in June 1876, the triggering events were much more immediate,” Knutson said.

In July 1876 a rumor was spread by horse back rider Julius Hankey that the Indians were on the warpath at Fergus Falls, French and Foxhome — and that a number of settlers had already been killed.

“This rumor seems to have been triggered by the observation of an Indian party butchering a settler's steer in the French area,” Knutson said. “The rumor caused the settlers in the Underwood area to hurriedly load up their families into wagons and release their livestock. Some left so quickly they didn’t take food or water with them.”

Knutson said that area settlers joined into concentrated groups to defend themselves as they traveled. Some went to Dolmers store in Tordenskjold Township and others proceeded south to Fort Pomme de Terre, Herman, and to Alexandria. Many didn’t expect to return to their homesteads as an intact family.

“Those settlers that gathered at Dolmers store decided they would build an earthen fort for self defense, that being Fort Juelson,” Knutson said. “Settlers didn’t actually inhabit Fort Juelson for protection immediately after its completion in July of 1876.”

The rumors were determined to be unfounded.

“However,” said Knutson, “a few years later settlers did spend some time at the fort in response to new fears of an Indian attack. This information is contained in early memoirs of two different writers.”

During the past several months the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners, with assistance from Friends of Fort Juelson, has been working to finalize an agreement with the landowner, Underwood native Stanley Rudsenske of Austin, who plans to deed over 10 acres of land to the county.

Parking near the fort site is part of the long-range plans, with assistance from County Engineer Rick West. Bert Kinzler will work on a fencing proposal, making use of rail materials. He’s also researching the possibility of a light to illuminate the U.S. and Minnesota flags.

Chris Schuelke of the Otter Tail County Historical Society is assisting with Highway 210 signage. Knutson is pursuing a grass and flower seeding project, with assistance from the Prairie Wetlands Learning Center.

The walls of Fort Juelson, named in honor of Hans Juelson, were about 4-1/2 feet high and four feet thick. Built from sod cut by a plow, the fort was situated on a commanding position atop the hill. The fortification was 120 by 100 feet in size.

In order to make people feel more secure, military companies were formed in Pelican Rapids, what’s now Norwegian Grove Township and elsewhere in this area.

Even though Fort Juelson never was needed as a defense against Native American uprisings, it was seen — in succeeding years — as a symbol of early Otter Tail County courage, perseverance and pioneer unification.


WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?

Bookmark and Share

Comments

The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post. To post a comment you will need to register. Or, if you're already registered but have not included your true, verifiable identity with your registration, you will need to update your account to include your identity. Effective Dec. 1, 2009, all posts appear with the commenter's true identity, which must be verified by site staff. Those who registered prior to Dec. 1, 2009, should be aware that once you update your information with your true identity, all prior posts under your user name will also indicate your true identity. If you do not wish to link yourself to prior comments, you should register again with a different user name.

Posted by Newshound (anonymous) on March 4, 2009 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

C'mon folks. A "fort" that was never inhabited. A "fort" that was never actually used in any sort of "combat" A fort with walls 4' high. You got a non-historical site here folks. Surely there are some REAL historically significant places around the County.
Sorry, I'm a serious history buff but this is just too much of a stretch. Save your time and money.

Posted by Focused (anonymous) on March 5, 2009 at 1:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Although I am not the history buff that you claim to be, I do know that a fort can be described as a fortified building OR a strategic position. To you this site may not mean much, but to those of us who have a deep heritage in this area, the imagery of our ancestors gathering to protect themselves and all that they had worked so hard for is very historical. From what I have observed, this community has no problem with spending their time and money on the preservation of what is important. How many small towns do you know of that have found so many positive ways to keep their town thriving.
Amy Bjornstad-Pearce

Posted by Jarrett (anonymous) on October 28, 2009 at 8:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

In Response to Newshound: Does a fort have to have been engaged in combat to be considered historically significant? I think you are confused about what history actually is. Its not very often someone finds evidence of a historically significant event that is as prolific as Fort Juelson in their backyard. I challenge Newshound to go out and find some "REAL" history around the county, if that is what he's looking for. I bet he won't find a 100' x 120' fort anywhere else in the county. Fort Juelson may not be as exciting as what he watches on the History Channel. But, history is not just about old buildings, it's about the people and what they knew at the time and how they felt and responded to events. Fort Juelson is local history and a county historic site is well worth the money and time in educating and preserving Ottertail County heritage.

Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)

(Requires free registration.)

You may also register to comment in our forums at www.fergusfeedback.com.