Procedures and Processes Phase II: Evaluation CRM Phases I-III This presentation uses materials taken from Ricardo Elia’s Cultural Resources Archaeology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Eligibility and Standards James Garrison Arizona State Historic Preservation Officer.
Advertisements

State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) ACMP Conference Juneau, AK 2007.
Spring ÇGIE398 - lecture 10 SSM in detail1.
Environmental Compliance Negotiating our way through the process…
Cultural Heritage and its Management Chaco Culture National Historical Park Larry J. Zimmerman.
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT of 1966 as amended Garry J. Cantley Regional Archeologist Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The National Register of Historic Places. NOT THE: National Historic Registry National Historic Registry Historical List Historical List Historical Registry.
Writing a Preliminary Assessment (The example of the Environmental Review Report) [DATE][SPEAKERS NAMES]
Procedures and Processes Phase III: Mitigation CRM Phases I-III This presentation uses materials taken from Ricardo Elia’s Cultural Resources Archaeology.
IDENTIFYING & EVALUATING HISTORIC PROPERTIES NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES –CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION HISTORIC.
Consultation with First Nations in Forest Management: A Case Study on Culturally Modified Tree (CMT) Management Cons 370 Jan. 29, 2003 by Pamela Perreault,
HISTORICAL THINKING SKILLS CHRONOLOGY AND CONTEXTUALIZATION.
NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.
1. Identify Stakeholders 2. Establish the Criteria 3. Identify Potential Sites 4. Initial Screening/ Evaluations & Short List 5. Specific Site Study 6.
Federal Preservation Activities: Part 1. What did With Heritage So Rich (1965) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provide to administer.
PRIMARY/SECONDARY SOURCE HISTORY LABS SOCIAL STUDIES CRITICAL THINKING LABS.
Driving Indiana’s Economic Growth. Management and Preservation of Indiana's Historic Bridges: A Programmatic Approach Thanks to Mead & Hunt & FHWA-IN.
THE FOUR STEP SECTION 106 PROCESS: AN INTRODUCTION TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION All reproduction rights reserved.
Field Survey Introduction. What is a survey? Survey = process of identifying and gathering data on a community's historic resources. Field survey= the.
Literature Review and Parts of Proposal
COSCDA Workshop Renovation, Reconstruction and Renewal of Historic Properties and Neighborhoods Section 106 and Programmatic Agreements Overview.
“Knowing Revisited” And that’s how we can move toward really knowing something: Richard Feynman on the Scientific Method.
CEQA & Archeology Cultural and Historical Resources: A Toolbox for Preservation A Toolbox for Preservation Michelle C. Messinger Historian II September.
Field Survey Introduction. What is a survey? Survey means a process of identifying and gathering data on a community's historic resources. It includes.
Florida Cultural Resources and How They Relate to Your Public Works Project Presented by: Brent Handley, MA, RPA Archaeology Division Director.
Environmental Planning CULTURAL RESOURCES CH 5 - HO # 13
Mitigation in the Section 106 Process Dave Berwick Army Program Manager Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
CHAPTER 3 SCOPING AND AGENCY COORDINATION. Scoping - the procedure for determining the appropriate level of study of a proposed project/activity - process.
Is there a future for the past? Chaco Culture National Historical Park Larry J. Zimmerman.
1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CULTURAL RESOURCES LAWS AND REGULATIONS CH 5 CH 5 HO # 13, 13a, 13b
Nadine Peterson Preservation Planner NH Division of Historical Resources Lynne E. Monroe Preservation Company Christopher W. Closs Christopher W. Closs.
#oldhousefair Old v/s Historic What is historic anyway? Melissa Wyllie.
United Nations Regional Seminar on Census Data Dissemination and Spatial Analysis for Arabic Speaking Countries, Amman, Jordan May 2011 Identification.
3D Technology and the Section 106 Process Matt Diederich Archaeologist Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Oregon Heritage Programs Division.
Qualitative Research January 19, Selecting A Topic Trying to be original while balancing need to be realistic—so you can master a reasonable amount.
National Historic Districts And Why Taylor Should Be Among Them.
By Rachel Coleman.  “ The head of any federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking.
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project (FERC No. 2079) Cultural Technical Working Group Meeting November 18, 2008.
Historical Resources SURVEY SAVVY Marie Nelson State Historian II OHP-Survey/CLG Coordinator Sep 07 – Chico.
Historic Preservation Memoranda of Agreement. What is an MOA? As part of the Section 106 review process, it is an agreement among an agency official,
PSY 219 – Academic Writing in Psychology Fall Çağ University Faculty of Arts and Sciences Department of Psychology Inst. Nilay Avcı Week 9.
Introduction to Anthropology,Sociology & Psychology
The Preservation Process. Sequence of Preservation actions 1. Setting standards or criteria that define what is worth preserving. 2. Undertaking a survey.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Presenter Name School of Drafting Regulations for Borehole Disposal of DSRS 2016 Vienna, Austria Siting Strategies.
Archaeology 101.
South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office and the Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands July 24, 2013 National Grasslands Visitor Center.
Cultural Resources office — St. Louis Planning & Urban Design Agency an introduction.
Suzanne Derrick Technical Director – Cultural Resources FCC Section 106 Process and the Archeology of Tower Siting Panelist Presentation May 4, 2016.
Integration of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) NEPA and NHPA A Handbook for Integrating NEPA and.
The National Register. The National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places is authorized by Section 101 (a)(1)(A)of the.
Anth January 2012.
Research Design
National Treasures: Brownfields and the National Historic Preservation Act Brownfields 2006 Boston, MA.
EIA approval process, Management plan and Monitoring
101 New London Road Newark, Delaware
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project FERC Project No February 26, 2008.
Temporary Works Co-ordination
Determination of Eligibility 5/4/16
Pedestrian Survey.
Evaluation Real Archaeology.
Environmental Prequalification Requirements
Review for Final.
The Role of the SHPO John Pouley, Assistant State Archaeologist
Determination of Eligibility 6/21/17
Determination of Eligibility 2/20/19
Background research Starting a Project.
Determination of Eligibility 3/21/18
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
Presentation transcript:

Procedures and Processes Phase II: Evaluation CRM Phases I-III This presentation uses materials taken from Ricardo Elia’s Cultural Resources Archaeology MATRIX course prepared for the Society for American ArchaeologyMATRIX

On from Phase I The contractor who does the Phase I often does Phase II. Why? They know the site and turf better than others.

After you find the sites, what’s next? Evaluation For Section 106 of NEPA, that involves figuring out if the properties are likely to be significant, which means they meet the National Register criteria. Do sites "possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association" and also meet one or more of four eligibility criteria. a)sites associated with significant events; b)sites associated with significant people; c)sites that embody a type, period, or method of construction; or represent a master's work; or possess high artistic values; or represent a significant, distinguishable entity; and d)sites "that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history."

Significance examples Gettysburg battlefield is certainly significant under Criterion A. The lands at Mount Vernon could qualify under Criterion B because of their association with George Washington. An Iroquois village site with longhouse architecture typical of the period might qualify under C. What about archaeological sites? For archaeological sites, especially prehistoric ones, Criterion D

Four Goals of a Phase II Evaluation Survey or “Site Examination” 1. The horizontal and vertical extent of the site must be determined in order to delineate boundaries for National Register purposes. 2. The basic identification of the site type and chronological range must be established. Is the site a single- or multiple-component site? Is it a habitation, settlement, industrial, or special use site? 3. The archaeological integrity of the site must be assessed: Is the site well enough preserved to retain its archaeological associations? Is the site of sufficient complexity and material culture to provide meaningful data? 4. Does the site contain enough integrity and data to allow important research questions to be addressed through excavation and analysis?

More Detailed Background Studies Historical sites often require deed research to determine the history of ownership and occupation of the property. If the site type is known, additional research will be carried out in the appropriate research area. Example: if a 19th-century industrial site was discovered, Phase II research would try to identify the specific industry as well as explore the industry's development and characteristics in order to understand the discovered site's role in it. Mill Ruins, Minneapolis

From shovel tests to 1 x 1’s Test Excavations Establishing Site boundaries Shovel tests and coring are usually okay Significance usually requires larger units 1 x 1 meter is the most common. Arbitrary stratigraphic levels are okay. Careful excavation is crucial. The idea is to in order to assess site integrity and to recover the kinds of qualitative information needed to evaluate whether the site is likely to be significant.

1 x 1m tests vs. block units 1 x 1 m tests allow you to cover more of the site. May give better idea of whether there are activity areas Block units provide better information about site integrity. Mill Creek Bridge, Cherokee Co., Iowa Site example

Just recovering more data is not enough. You need to do what is necessary to characterize and understand that data. Examples: Geophysical remote sensing might be used to identify buried features or to delineate subsurface walls and foundations. Radiocarbon dating will be attempted at prehistoric sites in order to learn the chronology of sites. Floral and faunal analysis, soils analysis to understand the ecological nature of the site and its use by people The goal is to understand the nature of the site so that its research potential and significance may be determined.

Evaluating Potential Significance After testing, does a site meet National Register eligibility criteria? For most archaeological sites, especially prehistoric ones, that means that the site has the potential to answer important research questions (Criterion D). Must articulate the important research questions Must show how the excavation and analysis of the site's data (as understood on the basis of the Phase II investigations) will effectively address those questions To do this, the archaeologist must be knowledgeable of the archaeology of similar sites in the region and the broad research questions being asked in the field.

About those research questions The State Plan again… A Maryland Example: Blueberry Hill

The Phase II Report 1)How well does the report summarize the earlier Phase I work? 2) What additional background research and/or historical studies were conducted for the Phase II? 3) How did the testing program 1) define the site's boundaries; and 2) evaluate the quantitative and qualitative cultural characteristics of the site? 4) Does the project explicitly utilize historic contexts as evaluative frameworks? 5) What kinds of laboratory and analytical studies were done? 6) What kinds of research questions are developed in the report? How cogent is the articulation of research value? 7) Does the project explicitly utilize the National Register criteria for evaluation in determining whether or not the site is potentially significant?

Remember! Phase II work is providing data and advice to the agency that is obligated to perform the work. As with Phase I, results are proprietary. The agency is likely to comment on, edit, and criticize your draft Phase II report before it is submitted to the SHPO. The SHPO in turn may do the same, so be prepared to make revisions. AND…

It’s only a recommendation. The archaeologist recommends that a property is potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register… …not that a particular site is significant or eligible for the National Register. A determination of eligibility is made by others in the Section 106 process (the agency official in consultation with the SHPO/THPO and others). Example: "Site X is considered potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register under Criterion D etc. It is recommended that the site be avoided by the proposed project; if avoidance is not possible, then a data recovery project should be undertaken to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on the site."