Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 30
31 context or producing educational brochures. These products The Montana DOT has worked closely with some tribes are intended to provide information on how to deal with this in the state to employ nontraditional approaches to archaeo- site type in the future and educate the public. The DOT still logical data recovery. For example, on one project the Con- samples the site to be affected by the project as part of the federated Salish and Kootenai Tribes reported that a group of mitigation. Creative mitigation is also used on projects sites were eligible for the National Register, but that these where proposed ROWs affect only a small portion of a site. sites were marginal in the view of the DOT. Because the tribe In these cases, the agency does some traditional data recov- expressed interest in the sites, the agency approved limited ery of the site in addition to developing a context for the type standard data recovery on the sites, and then took the balance of site being affected. of the money that would have been required for a more com- prehensive data recovery and funded an oral history project The Alabama DOT is developing a PA to establish a for the tribe to research and record place names in the area of creative mitigation process for dealing with submerged the sites. This project resulted in a product that met the con- archaeological sites. The DOT is currently reviewing previ- cerns of the tribe and the compliance needs of the DOT. ously recorded sites that have been submerged for several years by past Tennessee Valley Authority projects. Given Some DOTs have purchased significant archaeological the extremely high cost and complex logistics associated sites as a form of mitigation. The Wisconsin DOT purchased with testing inundated sites, the PA calls for the DOT to pay the privately owned portion of a burial mound located both for the analysis of existing collections that were excavated inside and outside of its ROW. This mitigation plan protected before the creation of the Tennessee Valley Authority lakes, the mound from future impacts. The DOT took a similar as opposed to conducting archaeological investigations of approach to a burial site located in a proposed project corri- these submerged sites. In some cases, these collections date dor. In this case, the DOT changed the project design to avoid back to the days of the Works Progress Administration. The the burial site, but ensured its preservation by purchasing the impetus for the PA was the presence of a recorded, inun- site, which was located on private property and adjacent to dated shell midden site within a DOT project area. The PA the ROW. The agency used project funds to make these pur- only involves sites that do not have the potential to contain chases. The Arkansas DOT has also purchased sites that human remains. extended outside project ROWs. In one case, the DOT pur- chased and now owns two sites located in agricultural fields The Alabama DOT, in consultation with the SHPO and and incorporated the sites into a wetland mitigation area FHWA, is also looking into ways to improve the National associated with the project. This removed the sites from Register evaluations of sites for which no archaeological or impacts resulting from continuous cultivation. historic contexts currently exist. One approach involves using data recovery funds (or portions of funds) to conduct The Georgia DOT assumed stewardship responsibility for surveys of the drainages where these sites are located. The a Civil War era battery located in a wetland mitigation site for purpose of these surveys is to develop predictive models and a widening project. The DOT hired Southeastern Archeolog- historic contexts, defining settlement patterns and site types ical Services to assess the integrity of the site and develop a within the drainages. These contexts also identify the preservation and stabilization plan. After consulting with the research potential and value of the various site types within National Park Service and the National Clearinghouse for a given drainage. Archaeological Site Stabilization at the University of Missis- sippi, the DOT and Southeastern Archaeological Services TxDOT has funded the development of general archaeo- determined that the best course of action to maintain and sta- logical research themes, resource evaluation methodologies, bilize the site would be a pro-active but passive approach of historic contexts, etc., as part of data recovery deliverables. annual monitoring and revegetation with native plant species. These funds are added onto the general cost for data recover- The DOT will administer the plan with assistance from ies. One example was the development of a protocol for deal- National Park Service staff at Fort Pulaski National Monu- ing with burned rock middens. The Nevada DOT has also ment in Chatham County, Georgia, and from the Georgia taken this approach. The rock circle synthesis discussed in Department of Natural Resources Law Enforcement (33,34). chapter two was developed using funds from data recovery projects. The Nevada DOT is also working with experts in the state to develop lithic sourcing data and is funding the chemi- SUMMARY cal analyses required to source these materials. This research is done in the context of Section 106 compliance for specific DOTs, SHPOs, and CRM firms expressed a general enthu- projects, where the DOT directs project monies into this type siasm for geophysical technology. Geophysical techniques of study. These studies demonstrate the agencies' commitment are viewed as cost-effective ways of improving archaeolog- to the archaeology of the state, and enhance its credibility in ical resource identification and evaluation efforts and, the eyes of the SHPO and federal land managing agencies. because they are nondestructive, they are appropriate for These studies also help in the evaluation and interpretation of properties about which tribes have cultural or religious con- archaeological resources encountered on DOT projects. cerns. Respondents noted, however, that the use of different
OCR for page 30
32 geophysical methods is still considered to be experimental. significant sites, a number of DOTs have found a way to As a result, some DOTs are testing the efficacy of geophys- fund historic context development and other studies that are ical investigations in the context of different environmental needed for better evaluation and management of archaeo- settings and site types. In terms of future research needs, the logical sites that will be affected by transportation projects. Oregon DOT recommended a study on GPR. The study Other creative mitigation efforts used by DOTs include the might, for example, involve the application of GPR to dif- development of resource syntheses as part of data recovery ferent site types across the state, providing a baseline for efforts and the purchase of significant archaeological sites future use of GPR during archaeological surveys and site within and outside DOT project ROWs. evaluations. This type of study could reduce the time and cost for future projects in which these types of sites were In terms of additional suggestions for future studies, the encountered. Most importantly, this is a noninvasive Nevada DOT and the Arizona FHWA division office identi- approach to archaeological investigations. The state's tribes fied the need for a nationwide study on the use of site burial are supportive of this type of work. as a form of mitigation. This study would examine, on a regional basis, when and how site burials can be used given Several DOTs also supported creative approaches that different types of soils and geomorphological environments, deal with marginally eligible sites or sites for which no his- and different types of sites. The results of this research would toric context exists. A number of states have turned the chal- be made operational through a nationwide programmatic lenge of dealing with these types of sites into opportunities agreement on when it is appropriate to bury sites and when it for creative mitigation measures. By dealing expeditiously is not. The New Mexico DOT recommended that FHWA (or not at all) with marginal sites and sliver takes of more fund a study on the benefits of using creative mitigation.