Religion as Cultural Resource

2020 ◽  
pp. 127-170
Author(s):  
Michael D. McNally

This chapter explores what results when Native peoples articulate religious claims in the language of culture and cultural resources under environmental and historic preservation law. It argues that cultural resource laws have become more fruitful in two respects. First, there is more emphatic insistence on government-to-government consultation between federal agencies and tribes. Second, in 1990, National Historic Preservation Act regulations were clarified by designating “Traditional Cultural Properties” as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and in 1992, that law was amended to formally engage tribal governments in the review process. In light of these developments, protection under the categories of culture and cultural resource have proved more capacious for distinctive Native practices and beliefs about sacred lands, but it has come at the expense of the clearer edge of religious freedom protections, while still being haunted, and arguably bedraggled, by the category of religion from which these categories ostensibly have been formally disentangled.

Author(s):  
T.J. Ferguson ◽  
Leigh Kuwanwisiwma

Traditional cultural properties are significant because of the role they play in the retention and transmission of historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices of a living traditional community. They are routinely identified and evaluated as historic properties during research activities needed for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on cultural resources. To be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, traditional cultural properties need to be tangible places (a district, site, building, structure or object), must meet one or more of the National Register eligibility criteria, must have integrity of relationship and condition, must have been important for at least fifty years, and must have definable boundaries. The methods and concepts pertinent to research of traditional cultural properties in the Southwest are reviewed in this chapter.


1998 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 5-8
Author(s):  
Gail Thompson

Proposed construction and development projects that require Federal permits are subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires that the Federal decision-maker take into account the project's potential effects on cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Over the years and especially after 1990 when the National Park Service released Bulletin 38, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), Section 106 review has increased the consideration of designating TCPs and consultation with the Indian tribal organizations that value them. Bulletin 38 defines TCPs as places that have been historically important in maintaining the cultural identify of a community.


Author(s):  
Robert Cast

With only ten chapters, Tribal Cultural Resource Management provides model strategies of what it takes to properly “manage” cultural resources. Although it is geared toward tribal governments and creating the right combination of preservation and protection of their culture, don’t let the title fool you, this book is for any person who has a responsibility as a land manager. Those currently involved in Cultural Resource Management (CRM) work should give this book a close read. Off hand, I can think of several federal agencies, especially those operating without Cultural Resource Management Plans, who could truly benefit from following the practical strategies outlined in this readable and informal book.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Smith ◽  
August Fuelberth ◽  
Sunny Adams ◽  
Carey Baxter

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) established the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), which requires federal agencies to address their cultural resources, defined as any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object. NHPA Section 110 requires federal agencies to inventory and evaluate their cultural resources. Section 106 requires them to determine the effect of federal undertakings on properties deemed eligible or potentially eligible for the NRHP. Camp Perry Joint Training Center (Camp Perry) is located near Port Clinton, Ohio, and serves as an Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) training site. It served as an induction center during federal draft periods and as a prisoner of war camp during World War II. Previous work established boundaries for a historic district and recommended the district eligible for the NRHP. This project inventoried and analyzed the character-defining features of the seven contributing buildings and one grouping of objects (brick lamp posts) at Camp Perry. The analysis is to aid future Section 106 processes and/or the development of a programmatic agreement in consultation with the Ohio State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).


Author(s):  
Theresa Pasqual

Tribal governments in the Southwest employ a number of individuals to help with the preservation of tribal values and places. In this chapter, Theresa Pasqual, former director of Acoma Pueblo’s Historic Preservation Office and an Acoma tribal member, talks about her professional pathway, how Acoma has worked with other tribes to protect traditional cultural properties (TCPs), the challenges that tribes face in implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and how tribal values can be incorporated into the preservation process. Based on her long experience, she emphasizes the importance of stewardship, listening, and collaboration—with the latter including collaboration between tribes as well as with archaeologists, anthropologists, and historians. She also provides insights into the process for the recent successful nomination of Mount Taylor to the New Mexico Register of Cultural Historic Properties, the largest such property currently on the register.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Smith ◽  
Megan Tooker ◽  
Sunny Adams

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) established the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), which requires federal agencies to address their cultural resources, defined as any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object. NHPA section 110 requires federal agencies to inventory and evaluate their cultural resources. Section 106 requires them to determine the effect of federal undertakings on properties deemed eligible or potentially eligible for the NRHP. Camp Perry Joint Training Center (Camp Perry) is located near Port Clinton, Ohio, and serves as an Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) training site. It served as an induction center during federal draft periods and as a prisoner of war camp during World War II. Previous work established boundaries for an historic district and recommended the district eligible for the NRHP. This project inventoried and evaluated Camp Perry’s historic cultural landscape and outlined approaches and recommendations for treatment by Camp Perry cultural resources management. Based on the landscape evaluation, recommendations of a historic district boundary change were made based on the small number of contributing resources to aid future Section 106 processes and/or development of a programmatic agreement in consultation with the Ohio State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).


Author(s):  
Michael Quennoz

On behalf of the City of Houston and the Memorial Park Conservancy, Gray & Pape, Inc. conducted intensive pedestrian surveys of three areas totaling 144.4 hectares (357.6 acres) of Memorial Park, City of Houston, Harris County, Texas. Fieldwork was carried out between April 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019, under Texas Antiquities Annual Permit Number 8465. The following report presents the results of site file and background research, survey methods, field results, and conclusions and recommendations for each of these surveys. The goals of the intensive pedestrian surveys were to assist the Memorial Park Conservancy in identifying the presence of cultural resources as they are defined by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (36 CFR 800), and provide management recommendations for identified resources. Survey methods, site identification and delineation, and reporting adhere to standards established by the Archeology Division of the Texas Historical Commission, the Council of Texas Archeologists, and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. At this time, the Memorial Park Conservancy plans to conduct standard park maintenance activities including low impact mechanical clearing of the invasive understory, spraying, and new plantings in each of the areas surveyed. Gray & Pape, Inc. focused particular attention on the State Antiquities Landmark-designated (#8200003264) Camp Logan archaeological site (41HR614) that encompasses large portions of Memorial Park. As a result of survey findings, the boundary for 41HR614 has been expanded to include the entirety of the former Camp Logan footprint as preserved within the boundaries of Memorial Park. The boundary of the previously recorded prehistoric site 41HR1217 was also extended. Four new prehistoric sites (41HR1226, 41HR1227, 41HR1229, 41HR1230) and one new multicomponent site (41HR1228) were also recorded. The 12.4-hectare (30.6-acre) Sports Complex survey resulted in the identification of five historic features considered part of 41HR614: the partial remains of a Camp Logan era road, segments of two Camp Logan era ditches, a Camp Logan concrete grease trap, and a concrete signpost from the 1940s. Gray & Pape recommends that the grease trap and signpost be avoided by Memorial Park Conservancy planned activities. The remaining features will not be impacted by current planned Memorial Park Conservancy activities. Based on the results of this survey, and with these protective measures in place, Gray & Pape recommends that the no further cultural resources work be required in the remaining portions of the Sports Complex project area and that the project be cleared to proceed as currently planned. The 76-hectare (189-acre) Bayou Wilds – East survey resulted in the identification of four new prehistoric sites (41HR1226, 41HR1227, 41HR1229, 41HR1230) and one new multicomponent site (41HR1228). The boundaries of the prehistoric site 41HR1217 and the historic site 41HR614 were extended A total of 14 new features were identified as associated with 41HR614, as well as two historic-age structures. Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends avoidance of the identified sites, features, and historic age structures. Based on the results of this survey, and with these protective measures in place, Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends no further cultural resources work be required in the remaining portion of the Bayou Wilds – East project area and that the project be cleared to proceed as planned. The 56-hectare (138-acre) Northwest Trails – North survey resulted in the identification of four historic-age structures, nearly identical footbridges constructed of irregular blocks and mortar that are part of the park’s active trail network; as well as a historical isolate. Based on the results of this survey, and with these protective measures in place, Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends that the no further cultural resources work be required in the remaining portions of the Northwest Trails – North project area and that the project be cleared to proceed as currently planned. As part of the Unanticipated Finds Plan developed by Gray & Pape, Inc. and the Memorial Park Conservancy, Gray & Pape, Inc. archaeologists identified and recorded nine cultural features (seven manholes, one grease trap, one segment of vitrified clay pipe) uncovered by activities undertaken by the Memorial Park Conservancy and their contractors. In each case ongoing work in the area of the newly encountered feature was halted until the feature was fully documented by a Gray & Pape, Inc. archaeologist, and potential impacts were coordinated between Gray & Pape, Inc., the Memorial Park Conservancy, and the Texas Historical Commission. Gray & Pape, Inc. also coordinated with the Texas Historical Commission on two occasions in relation to Memorial Park Conservancy projects for which no fieldwork was required. As a project permitted through the Texas Historical Commission, Gray & Pape, Inc. submitted project records to the Center of Archaeological Studies at Texas State University in San Marcos, Texas.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie J. McCormack ◽  
Kary Stackelbeck

ABSTRACTThis article presents a case study of the process of developing and implementing mitigation as the result of adverse effects to cultural resources from the drawdown of Lake Cumberland, Kentucky. Signs of a dam failure in early 2007 triggered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to implement the emergency drawdown. While the drawdown prevented a life safety catastrophe, it created a new erosion zone and exposed archaeological sites to looters. When it became clear that conventional Section 106 procedures to identify and evaluate these endangered archaeological resources were not an option, alternative and creative mitigation became a necessary approach for the Corps to meet its obligations under the National Historic Preservation Act. This article discusses the creative brainstorming among the Corps, Kentucky state historic preservation officer, and tribes that led to three alternative mitigation measures aimed at educational outreach, raising public awareness, and staff training. Furthermore, the article identifies challenges encountered during the implementation of the mitigation measures. Through the presentation of our mitigation journey, we share some of our lessons learned to improve awareness of the challenges and successes one may encounter during the execution of such alternative measures.


1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 941-942
Author(s):  
Pamela Bergmann

ABSTRACT In recognition that oil spills and hazardous substance releases typically require response actions within the first 24 hours, the Alaska Regional Response Team (RRT) has developed draft Cultural Resources Protection Guidelines for Alaska to establish an emergency procedure for taking cultural resources into account during responses and to ensure that response actions comply with the National Historic Preservation Act. The draft guidelines were developed in consultation with the Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The mechanism for formally establishing the guidelines’ emergency procedures is a programmatic agreement, which will be signed by appropriate federal and state agencies’ historic preservation officials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document