From Alan James – 14 May 2020
I don’t think so, there isn’t any obvious reason why the name wouldn’t have been put on that piece, in the north of Swine Drum field, cf. Smith’s Plantation by Clauchandolly to the south.
As you see, ‘Dambog Plantation’ is marked at the NW corner of the Cooper Croft field NX651484. It is bounded by a footpath (also not present on the 1854 map) which runs from the burn near the croft, across to the corner of that older, un-named plantation in Swine Drum field, roughly along the 40 metre contour and cutting off that corner of Cooper Croft field; it continues thence over to Culraven. In spite of its name, no trees are shown in Dambog Plantation, so it was presumably new, and it doesn’t appear on modern maps (even from 1920s), so it was probably not a much of a success. But Adam Gray’s list shows the name was remembered, and his separate listing of Dambogs and Dambogs Plantation (sic) as field names would imply that this corner and the remainder of the Cooper Croft field were separate units.
The name implies that there was a mill dam here or in the vicinity, no doubt serving the Mill of Senwick. But no dam is shown on the 1854 map, nor any lade serving the mill, and by the 2nd ed. map, the mill has gone, replaced by Senwick Row. So I guess the dam had been drained and the water re-routed along the Mill Hall Burn, which had obviously been seriously engineered by the time of the 1850 survey. The ‘bog’ would have been what was left by these operations.
An intriguing bit of toponymic archaeology!