Following on the momentum of the First Ohio Archaeology Week in 2000, this year's program, at least in the Dayton area, appeared to grow. Increased programming at SunWatch and Boonshoft Museums was well attended. Reports from other outlying areas or presenters have not been received as of this date (September 27, 2001). Once again, requests were made to OAC, OHS/OHPO for support of personnel and/or finances for the week. Additionally, SunWatch applied to the Ohio Humanities Council for funding to help defray costs of poster printing, mailing, etc. for the week. The OAC donated $500. OHS/OHPO donated $1,000. SunWatch donated the office, computer, staffing time, etc. and the Ohio Humanities grant provided $1,998.
Requests for Participation, and Evaluation forms were once again, as last year, sent to all OAC members and other historians/prehistorians/archaeologists throughout the state. The events were compiled as submitted into a listing by geographic area by Sandy Yee of SunWatch. Brochure and poster designs were generously contributed, once again, by William Patterson. Sr., and these materials were printed at Mazer Corporation in Dayton (however not for free this year). The posters were, once again, a beautiful depiction of the state of Ohio, as an excavated feature/square, with inset photos relating the sites and events highlighted that week statewide. They were mailed out in early May to all contributors, contact persons, and those requesting copies.
The brochures officially listed 11 organizations or sites for a combined total of 22 different programs over the week. At SunWatch alone, attendance for all programs was estimated at 500. Review forms or evaluations filled out and returned (it IS hard to force people to do an evaluation when they are anxious to move on) were all positive, and people were pleased to have had the chance to learn more about Ohio archaeology, history and prehistory.
The week of June that contained the Summer Solstice (in 2001 this fell on June 17-23) was chosen for Ohio's archaeology week. It provides a memorable link for state archaeologists and historians in all upcoming years as the Summer Solstice was recognized historically as well as prehistorically. Additionally, this week is very favorable to families on vacation, for schools are out by then. Furthermore, various sites have opened their summer field work/schools and can incorporate tours or workshops at the sites as one of their Ohio Archaeology Week educational activities for the public. A sincere thank you and congratulations to all who made this year's Ohio Archaeology Week a great success as we endeavor to showcase our sites and our science to the people of Ohio.
Federal Legislative Issues
House Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships
Eight members of the Ohio House of Representatives have been appointed by House Speaker Larry Householder to a House Select Committee to Study the Effectiveness of Ohio's Historical Programs and Partnerships. The purpose of Select Committees is to ensure that tax-funded programs are administered efficiently and effectively and that the intended objectives of publicly funded programs are achieved. The mission of this Select Committee includes examining how to strengthen the public-private partnership between the State of Ohio and the Ohio Historical Society (OHS), a private, not-for-profit institution that manages historical sites for the State of Ohio; developing long-term funding solutions to protect historic sites; examining how OHS spends funds on historic sites; and examining detailed budget and management plans for each of the historic sites before OHS receives additional state funds. OHS is scheduled to receive approximately $32 million in state funds over the two-year budget that began in July 2001.
The eight appointed Representatives are Chair, Kerry Metzger (R-New Philadelphia), Nancy Hollister (R-Marietta), Larry Flowers (R-Canal Winchester), Tom Raga (R-Mason), James Hoops (R-Napoleon), Dixie Allen (D-Dayton), Sylvester Patton (D-Youngstown), and Ray Miller (D-Columbus). The Committee is to prepare a report for Speaker Householder by February 15, 2002. The Select Committee is scheduled to begin hearings in October. The hearing agenda is being developed. The Ohio Archaeological Council will receive notices about the hearing schedule and other information pertinent to the Select Committee's charge as it becomes available. For further information about the Select Committee contact Representative Metzger's office at 77 South High Street, 11th Floor, Columbus, OH 43266-0603, telephone (614) 466-1695.
Senate Bill 83, Revision of Surface and In-Stream Mining Law
On May 22, 2001, S.B. 83 was passed by the Senate and forwarded to the House for consideration, where it was assigned to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. No hearings on the bill have been scheduled, though it is likely that the bill will receive consideration this session. Existing legislation does not allow the Ohio Department of Natural Resources to consider the presence of archaeological sites when issuing permits to mine non-coal minerals. S.B. 83 does not change this situation. The Ohio Archaeological Council may submit testimony to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee on this issue.
House Concurrent Resolution 5, Recognizing the Saponi Nation
This Resolution, to recognize the efforts of the Saponi (American Indian) Nation to keep their culture alive, was introduced on January 31, 2001 and assigned to the State Government Committee. No action has been taken on the Resolution.
Due to the tragic events of September 11, Congress is focusing on responding to these events. Fiscal Year 2002 (October 2001-September 2002) appropriations were to be completed by the end of September, but the events of September 11 have changed Congress' priorities. There are a number of bills in Congress with implications for the archaeological community.
HR 701, the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, establishes a separate fund to be administered by the Land and Water Conservation Fund for conservation, wildlife, recreation, and historic preservation projects. Each year through 2015, $150 million would be provided to the states for historic preservation projects.
HR 2646, the Farm Bill, includes a provision that would make archaeological sites eligible for the Farmland Protection Program, which promotes good environmental practices on farmland to protect habitat and natural resource protection. The provision allows a voluntary program that would use conservation easements to take land containing important archaeological sites out of production and in turn compensate the farmer for the conservation of the archaeological sites.
HR 2114, the National Monuments Fairness Act, amends the Antiquities Act and curtails the President's ability to designate National Monuments.
HR 2388, establishes criteria and a mechanism for the designation and support of National Heritage Areas.
HR 2420/S 329, the Peopling of America Theme Study Act, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a National Historic Landmark theme study relating to the peopling of America.
HR 1882, the Cultural Heritage Assistance Partnership Act, establishes National Park Service program to provide information, technical assistance, awards, and small grants to states, tribes, local governments, and non-profit groups for projects relating to historic preservation.
Two Parts of the Section 106 Regulations Invalidated
On September 19, the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia invalidated sections 800.4(d)(2) and 800.5(c)(3) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's (ACHP) Section 106 regulations. The court upheld the rest of the regulations. The rules had been challenged by the wireless telecommunications and mining industries. Section 800.4(d)(2) requires a federal agency to continue the Section 106 process at the ACHP's request if the ACHP objects to the agency's determination that there are no historic properties present in an undertaking or that historic properties will not be affected by the undertaking. Section 800.5(c)(3) grants the ACHP the authority to review an agency finding of no adverse effects when a State Historic Preservation Officer, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer or consulting party disagrees with the finding. The court ruled that these two sections violated the plain language of the National Historic Preservation Act in that they were substantive rather than procedural rules. Information about this ruling can be found at the ACHP's web site, www.achp.gov.
This is my last contribution to the Newsletter as the OAC President, and I would like to use the occasion first of all to thank the membership for the privilege of serving as the OAC President over the last two years. I would like also to give special thanks to the members of the Board and others who assumed committee responsibilities in the last two years. I also wish Brian Redmond success as he moves from President-elect to President. I am confident that the Council will continue to make a difference in Ohio archaeology under his leadership.
I spent the entire summer in the field or in the lab and consequently have done little OAC business myself. Board members have been busy, however, as revealed by the following notes from the September Board meeting. Following a second successful Archaeology Week the Board has decided to explore ways to pursue secure funding and to increase participation in years to come. After years of planning, the OAC web page is finally close to completion. It has been constructed in a way that should make it a productive tool for publicizing the Council's goals and accomplishments both for members and interested citizens. Despite attempts to encourage grant submissions, few members have applied. Because of this the Board intends to re-examine the scope of the general grant and the amount of the award in the hopes that more members will take advantage of this opportunity. In an effort to bring the Code of Regulations up to date, Al Tonetti has incorporated membership-approved revisions into a revised draft which will be presented to the membership in the near future. Although a wholesale change in organization and mission is not desirable, this initiative also offers the opportunity to assess other aspects of the Council, such as quorum criteria and membership categories, if members desire.
In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attack on New York City and the Pentagon, it appears clear that many priorities and practices will come under increased scrutiny. Especially if defense spending increases it is natural to expect cuts in "peripheral" investments, such as in heritage protection. We may see antiquities law come under fire, along with environmental protection legislation. Thus, while mourning the tragic loss of life and supporting counter-measures, we need to be alert to challenges to traditional sources of funding for archaeological research and the scope of antiquities law and programs. We need to be ready with alternatives that can adjust to the national emergency while at the same time preserve the progress made to date in cultural resource protection and management. The OAC potentially can provide a venue for addressing challenges to public support of heritage conservation should they occur.
For those members, hopefully none, who lost family or friends in this disaster, the Board and I extend our sincerest sympathy. For members engaged in rescue, recovery, and investigation at the crash sites, we extend our gratitude, support, and encouragement.
The autumn meeting has been scheduled for the Highbanks Metro Park north of Columbus. This is one of the most scenic places in central Ohio, and I hope members will make a special effort to attend. The conference room at the Nature Center is a pleasant space for a meeting. Furthermore, the park contains an earthen enclosure named the Orange Township Works by Squier and Davis. The lunch break will be extended to enable members to view this well-preserved earthwork located on the edge of a 100 foot high bluff overlooking the Olentangy River.
hope everyone had a productive summer and will have lots of news to share at the November meeting.
The Council is 26 years old this year, the new millennium is upon us, and Ohio celebrates its bicentennial in three years. All are causes for celebration and reflection. They are also opportunities to promote archaeology and advance the understanding and appreciation of Ohio's past. The conjunction of these historical events surely is a sign for the Council to think about its future.In the March 1999, issue of the Newsletter, Martha Otto reported on a Board of Directors meeting at which the topic of discussion was the future of the Council. In my term as President I hope to pursue many of the initiatives identified under Martha's direction.
Several are well under way. For example, an internet web site is under construction and should be up and running by the Spring Members meeting. This obviously can be a powerful way of both letting the world know of our existence and educating Ohioans about the archaeology of their state. On another front, the OAC has joined the Dayton Society of Natural History in a joint effort to inaugurate an Archaeology Week to be held June 19-25. You will be hearing more about this from Sandy Yee and Dave Bush.
Another item on Martha's list was preservation advocacy, to "continue and strengthen the Council's efforts to preserve significant cultural resources through public education and direct involvement in the legislative process." If a reason for uniting professionally oriented archaeology groups was required, one need look no further than the impending demise of Ohio's archaeological record. The economic boom of the late twentieth century combined with the revolution in agricultural and construction technology threaten to completely remove or rework Ohio's surface. This means that the archaeological remains of Ohio's early history and prehistory will, very soon, be destroyed forever. Somehow, representatives of the archaeological community, business, industry, development, government, indigenous people, media, and lay people must join together to protect or conserve the legacy of the past without impeding economic growth. I think the Council could play an important role in assessing the seriousness of the problem, educating the citizens of Ohio, and bringing the various constituents together to work toward agreeable solutions.
Membership was an important item on Martha's list. I have asked the Membership Committee to examine the question of whether the current level is reflective of the number of "joiners" in the Ohio archaeological community. Perhaps we are at the peak with around 100 members. On the other hand, perhaps there many potential members in the academic, contract, and avocational worlds who are waiting anxiously to be nominated. If there is an untapped pool of archaeologists who meet our membership criteria, what would it take to get them on board?
One group not represented prominently in the early years of the Council is avocational archaeologists. These are the Ohioans who lack degrees in archaeology but embrace the values of professional archaeology and want to, and often do, conduct professional level field and laboratory investigations under the direction of professional archaeologists. Two well established avocational groups that come to mind are the Central Ohio Valley Archaeological Society (COVAS), and the Toledo Area Aboriginal Research Society (TAARS). Undoubtedly there are others. Some members of these groups already are members of the Council and others are potential members. Setting aside the membership question, however, I think the Council should establish continuing relationships with such avocational groups as COVAS and TAARS for we share similar values and goals.
One item of unfinished business is the conference publication project. As members are acutely aware, we organized six conferences over the last eight years and have published the proceedings of only two of them. Bob Genheimer has nearly completed the Late Prehistoric volume and hopes to have it back from the printer by early summer. As a member of the Education Committee in 1991 when the idea for this project was hatched, I feel a sense of personal responsibility to see it through to completion. To that end I have asked the Education Committee to convene a meeting with the editors of published and unpublished volumes to work out procedures, set timetables, and discuss ways of sharing the workload. My goal is to get the remaining volumes completed during my term.
When the Council was founded 25 years ago everyone who was anyone in Ohio archaeology was a member. Why? Because the mandates of federal archaeological legislation had just hit Ohio and the implications were unknown. All archaeologists in the state wanted to know how their work was affected, or what funding opportunities were presented. Policies and regulations were hotly debated at the semi-annual meetings. Membership rose. There was a certification list, and an Archaeological Services Review Committee that reviewed member's contract reports. As processes and procedures solidified, momentum slowed, and membership began to decline. Certification was abandoned along with the Review Committee. Yet while part of the impetus for the Council's existence was federal preservation law, the purposes of the Council as expressed in the Articles of Incorporation were extremely broad. All members should have a copy of the Articles, and I recommend that you dig them out and reflect upon them. They may inspire ideas for future Council projects.
In closing, let me say that the Council has had a vibrant first 25 years and the potential for growth exists within the scope of the organization as initially conceived. I am pleased to be President of the group as we enter the 21st century. I would also like to challenge members to come forward with ideas that will enhance the status of professional archaeology in Ohio, advance knowledge, awareness, and preservation of the state's prehistoric and historic past, and revive the spirit of participation that characterized the Council in its early years.
Here we go again, perhaps. On January 18, 2000, State Representative James Buchy (R-Greenville) introduced House Bill (HB) 550, a bill to revise the offense of vandalism. The bill has been referred to the House Committee on Criminal Justice. The revisions are primarily technical in nature. Revisions relevant to archaeological concerns include clarifying that the offense of vandalism pertains to all private property, not just certain types of private property as indicated in the current law, and adds "but is not limited to" the definition of a cemetery. Under the bill the new definition for a cemetery would be "any place of burial and includes, but is not limited to, burial sites that contain American Indian burial objects placed with or containing American Indian human remains." According to Rep. Buchy's office, this bill was drafted and introduced after numerous requests to do so by artifact collectors, sellers, and buyers, many of whom are members of the Archaeological Society of Ohio.
Electronic review of HB550 or any proposed bill or existing legislation in Ohio can be made at www.legislature.state.oh.us.
The privilege clause and existing penalties are retained in the bill. The bill prohibits a person, without the privilege to do so, of knowingly causing physical harm to private property or serious physical harm to government property. The difference between physical harm and serious physical harm is that the latter results in a loss to the value of the property of $500 or more, while the former has no dollar threshold. Physical harm means any tangible or intangible damage to property that results in a loss to the property's value or interferes with its use or enjoyment, but does not include wear and tear by normal use.
On February 15, the National Mining Association filed a federal lawsuit challenging a number of provisions of the revised Section 106 regulations promulgated last year by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). The regulations remain in effect until otherwise ruled by the court.
Among other things, the lawsuit alleges that the revised regulations unlawfully 1) exceeds the role assigned to the ACHP by Section 106 in that it gives the ACHP substantive regulatory authority over other Federal agencies; 2) extends the reach of Section 106 in defining an undertaking; 3) extends Section 106 to properties not formally determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places; 4) enlarges the role of Indian tribes beyond that intended by Congress; 5) employs a vague and overbroad definition of what constitutes an adverse effect; 6) violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution by vesting the ACHP (which includes two members that are not appointed by the President -- i.e., NCSHPO and the National Trust) with authority or functions that may only be carried out by Presidential appointees; and 7) were promulgated without observing certain procedural aspects required by the Administrative Procedures Act, such as not meaningfully addressing the comments filed by the National Mining Association and publishing the regulations without adequate notice and opportunity to comment.
In 1997, the Ohio Historic Preservation Office (OHPO) initiated a comprehensive program to transfer data from over 100,000 paper files into digital format while building a comprehensive Geographic Information System (GIS) program for implementing its use. The data automation program focused extensively on the Ohio Historic Inventory and Ohio Archaeological Inventory (OHI & OAI respectively), as well as development of a customized GIS application known as MAPIT. This effort was supported by grants from the Ohio Department of Transportation.
Approximately 15,000 OHI forms were coded with grant assistance from the Gund Foundation in the mid-1980's. In 1997, the second and much larger phase of the OHI coding project was undertaken to examine, edit and enter data from paper forms into digital format. As a result of this project, a total of 81,078 forms were codified into electronic form. This represents a complete record of OHI received through calendar year 1997. Since March 1999, work has continued on OHI's received from 1998 to present date.
With respect to the OAI, an initial attempt at digital coding occurred in 1985 during which approximately 17,000 records were entered into an electronic database, under a grant from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In November of 1998, the second major effort to transfer the OAI into electronic format began in earnest. The goal of this project was to first check, edit, correct, and enter data from a backlog of over 7,500 forms that had accumulated and then 'clean-up' known issues with existing UTM coordinates and/or other spatial attribute data. 'Clean-up' of the data has taken a variety of forms and largely involves methodology designed to catch errors, typographic problems, inconsistencies, misplottings of sites, updating existing forms, adding continuation sheets, coding new entry forms, correcting the 7.5' topographic maps, transferring locational data from existing 15' quadrangles, and handling any other obvious errors in need of correction.
UTM correction consists of comparing OAI form, map, description, narrative and coordinates against a USGS 7.5' quadrangle. If the information on the OAI is correct, that record is added to the database. If the centroid of the site is not consistent with the plotting and associated information, then a new point is created with the corrected coordinates and entered into the database. As a result of this project, approximately 14,000 of approximately 23,000 forms being examined to date have had their UTM coordinates corrected. Currently, there are 32,881 sites recorded in the electronic OAI database and approximately 1,600 new sites have been added each year.
The MAPIT (Mapping and Preservation Inventory Tool) is a customized version of the popular ArcView GIS program developed by Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). MAPIT was designed by the National Park Service Heritage Preservation Services Cultural Resources GIS Facility (CRGIS). The MAPIT program is designed to bring various cultural resources together into one comprehensive computer desktop environment and is specifically designed for use by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office (OHPO) and by researchers of Ohio's cultural resources, both public and private. By providing the capability to extensively examine all of Ohio's resources in a spatial context, it is hoped that decision-makers will be able to use these data to make informed decisions while planning for a multitude of activities across the State. One of the powerful features of the MAPIT program is the ability to customize the program to address a variety of inventories and research questions, and thus once new data are available, they can be easily added to the existing application and coverages. The ability to use MAPIT will be available on public terminals at the OHPO central office and, to a more restricted degree, via the Internet.
While we are working to provide expedient and widespread access to the data as soon as possible, responsible stewardship of the data and technologies for protecting sensitive information are being developed specifically for this automation program. When the data are available, instructions for access will be provided at the OHPO website. Therefore, we strongly recommend going to the OHPO website (www.ohiohistory.org/resource/histpres/) which will provide all information about what data are available and in what format. Also, from the website, access will be available for the on-line versions of the National Register, OAI and OHI databases. The National Register database is scheduled to be on-line by March 2000; the OAI and OHI databases will go online thereafter. Again, any information about the availability of the on-line databases will be provided at the website.