Cultural resource management pdf

The National Park Service was created in and assumed responsibility for cultural resources associated with national parks and monuments. Archaeology played a prominent role in the Works Progress Administration WPA and other relief programs during the Great Depression, and large-scale investigations that employed thousands were conducted across the country. Cultural resource management, as it is currently practiced, was a product of the environmental movement of the s, when federal cultural resources were given the same level of protection as elements of the natural environment, such as wetlands and protected plant and animal species.

Cultural resource management deals with a range of resource types, and the breadth of the field will be reflected in the discussions that follow.

American Cultural Resources Association. Its website contains listings of cultural resource companies and consultants, as well as a discussion of the latest proposed legislation and cultural resource management news. National Park Service Policy Chapter 5. Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login. Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here.

King demystifies this web of regulations surrounding this field, providing frank, practical advice on how to ensure regulatory compliance in dealing with archaeological sites, historic buildings, urban districts, sacred sites and objects, shipwrecks, and archives. In this new edition, King reports on changes in cultural resource laws, regulations, and executive orders in the past five years and adds material on Section review, NEPA, and the 'Preserve America' executive order.

Collection of original writings on legal aspects of cultural resources protection from practicing lawyers and judges. The entrance of Native Americans into the world of cultural resource management is forcing a change in the traditional paradigms that have guided archaeologists, anthropologists, and other CRM professionals.

This book examines these developments from tribal perspectives and articulates native views on the identification of cultural resource, how they should be handled and by whom, and what their meaning is in contemporary life. Stapp and Burney also demonstrate the connections between cultural resource and other issues such as native sovereignty, economic development, human rights, and cultural integrity.

Recognising the inapplicability of Euro-American solutions to this part of the world, the essays of this volume investigate their own set of region-specific CRM strategies, and acknowledge both the necessity and possibility of mediating between the conflicting interests of short-term profitability and long-term sustainability. What is archaeology, and why should we do it? Tom King, arguably the best-known heritage management consultant in the United States, answers the basic question of every introductory student from the unique perspective of one who actively uses archaeology for cultural resource management.

King shows how contemporary archaeology, as part of the larger cultural resource management endeavor, acts to help preserve and protect prehistoric and historic sites in the United States and elsewhere. Brief biographies of other CRM archaeologists help students envision career paths they might emulate. The bookends with an exploration of some of the thorny problems facing the contemporary archaeologist to help foster class discussion. An ideal ice-breaker for introductory college classes in archaeology, one that will get students engaged in the subject and thinking about its challenges.

New Perspectives in Cultural Resource Management describes the historic developments, current challenges, and future opportunities presented by contemporary Cultural Resource Management CRM. CRM is a substantial aspect of archaeology, history, historical architecture, historical preservation, and public policy in the US and other countries. Chapter authors are innovators and leaders in the development and contemporary practice of CRM. Collectively they have conducted thousands of investigations and managed programs at local, state, tribal, and national levels.

The chapters provide perspectives on the methods, policies, and procedures of historical and contemporary CRM. Recommendations are provided on current practices likely to be effective in the coming decades. This handbook, a companion to the authoritative Handbook of Archaeological Methods, gathers original, authoritative articles from leading archaeologists on all aspects of the latest thinking about archaeological theory.

It is the definitive resource for understanding how to think about archaeology. A Suite , Washington D C , third "did you know? It was there; we were not in the wrong stances that can help to gather information or pro- place. However, such was the blackness of the vide support and strength to objects underwater. It takes could not see, we could only feel. Therefore, to a little time to get used to doing archeological gather condition information that was more than conservation essentially blindfolded.

As a diving verbally descriptive and subjective, we used den- archeological conservator, I was removing layers tal molding putty to take molds of the metal of rock-hard concretion—a mixture of marine plates and rivet heads in the small areas of the organisms, sediment, and metal corrosion that submarine's surface from which we removed con- had formed over time—from small areas of the cretion.

The two-part putty could be mixed submarine's surface in order to get information underwater, pressed onto the metal surface, and about the condition of the metal beneath.

It was pulled off after five minutes of curing. The molds certainly one of the more challenging condition were finely detailed, and provided technological reports I've had to write. Working underwa- any artifacts, so the conservation requirements ter requires some adapting of traditional conser- were quite minimal.

However, underwater arche- vation methods and materials Hunley sus- pended in its lin- to get the job done. The ing cradle after it problems are the same as on- was raised from land excavations: we need to the seabed. The backbone of the identify, strengthen, support, cradle consists of lift, and stabilize fragile arti- a steel frame- facts. But a slightly different work with four legs.

On the tool kit is needed. For exam- seabed, one at a ple, the water-based and sol- time, 32 heavy vent-based adhesives and nylon slings were placed under the consolidants that are the sta- submarine and ples of on-site archeological attached to the conservation on land sites are steel framework.

Extruded foam useless underwater! Instead inserts, or "pil- we use materials such as lows" were underwater-setting epoxies, formed-fitted to plumber's pipe-repair tape, the hull surface for maximum plaster of Paris, sand, mud, support.

We knew that the Housatonic wreck would probably contain typical shipboard artifacts of many different sizes, shapes, materials, and con- ditions, and we had planned carefully for the excavation. This planning is the crucial first step in any excavation project, and always includes the archeologists and conservators, and possibly other specialists such as engineers, microbiologists, or geologists, depending on the scale and nature of the project.

Working on shipwreck sites can involve handling objects from the tiniest button Typical concre- ology can be a conservation-intensive undertak- or textile fragment to enormous cannon, anchors, tion from USS ing if artifacts are raised, or even if structures and and ship timbers, or even entire ship structures. Materials that have been Hunley intact from the seabed in August , immersed in underwater environments for long intensive planning by archeologists, conservators, periods have undergone significant chemical and engineers, corrosion scientists, geologists, archi- physical changes, and generally do not react well tects, and many others began years before the to being brought into a new environment rich in operation.

The deterioration prob- For the Housatonic project, I had brought lems are often not fully understood, and the everything that would be needed for on-site con- required conservation treatments can be long and servation.

This meant dozens of plastic, sealable, complex. Many times, an object is not even visi- Tupperware-type containers and self-seal, Zip- ble before some kind of conservation treatment is lok-type bags of every shape and size for individ- performed on it, so the conservator may be the ual artifacts, as well as larger, sturdy, stackable first one to learn of the materials and details of an containers for bulk storage.

Other essential water- object. Underwater archeology is dependent on proof supplies include Tyvek for tags, Mylar conservation procedures, so the two disciplines frosted drafting film for drawings, non-corroding are closely intertwined.

The archeologist cannot brass nails for tagging wood or for custom-build- identify, and therefore cannot interpret, many ing crates, Sharpie permanent markers for water- objects before conservation.

One long, curved concretion was almost certainly a sword. University of On the Housatonic project, several days of South Carolina.

I had brought a deionizing column and portable conductivity meter, so I began desalination salt removal of some materials such as coal, ceramics, glass, and copper-alloy I also did some short chemical treatments of the ceram- ics that had organic and iron staining on them. When possible to do so without damage, I removed obscuring concretion to identify an object to help the archeologists interpret the excavation areas. This did not include the unidentified "concretions," which we knew would become damaged and unstable if we began breaking them apart without knowing what was inside.

Most of the conservation treatments could not be done without laboratory facilities. Many Anchored four miles offshore over the of the objects needed to be x-rayed for prelimi- wreck of Housatonic, our dive boat was small and nary identification, followed by technological was filled almost entirely with people, dive equip- research, and then long treatment times some- ment, and the excavation dredge motor. There times using specialized equipment. Examples of was little room for artifact storage, and artifact typical treatment needs are desalination, concre- drawing was impossible on the choppy seas.

The tion removal, polyethylene glycol impregnation most that could be done on the boat was to keep and freeze-drying of organic materials, and elec- a running log of artifact numbers, write identifi- trolytic reduction of metals to remove corrosion cation tags as the artifacts were brought up, and agents.

An added concern for the artillery fuses store the artifacts safely in a box of sea water. Many of When possible, the objects were immediately the Housatonic objects are still being conserved photographed. At the end of the diving day, we and studied, with the archeologists and conserva- motored back to port, and then the conserving tors working together to reveal and interpret the day began and continued into late evening.

The objects throughout the long processes. The long, drawing, and photographing each object. This is curved concretion that I just knew was a sailor's always the first priority for the objects: record, sword Naval Historical Center.

In light of this goal, we sought two care and housing of Native specific genres of information. We first searched American human remains recov- for published literature that would guide us in ered from archeological contexts our assessment of preservation, storage, and size have become an issue of the utmost importance constraints as they related to the storage of since the enactment of the Native American human remains. While anthropologists, reconstruction Bass, ; Ubelaker, ; museum managers, and Native American com- White, Unfortunately, the literature munities negotiate and struggle with NAGPRA neglects the issue of long-term housing of human issues, a publicly available housing standard has remains.

The second component of our evalua- yet to be devised and agreed upon by these tion involved assessing the needs of Native diverse communities. Published information Americans, physical anthropologists, museum regarding the care and storage of human remains curators, and collection managers, conservators, is vague at best, and assessment of appropriate and archeologists.

Different tribes have dif- parties within anthropology and the Native ferent needs when it comes to demonstrating American community. This lack of communica- proper respect for a deceased individual. Consultations specific to our col- preservation and respectful housing of human lections revealed that, in general, it is important remains, and no public consensus exists between for human remains to resemble a human form in sub-disciplines.

The following article considers storage. The bones should not be randomly scat- the issue of long-term storage and care of human tered throughout the box, nor should different remains in terms of preservation, NAGPRA parts of an individual be stored in separate areas requirements, and research needs. For example, crania are sometimes Our discussion is inspired by a recent housed separately from the post-cranial skeleton.

Our exist- It is preferable that the body be presented in a ing building, which houses classrooms, a labora- manner that is as close to its position prior to tory, and storage facilities, will be demolished, excavation or retrieval as possible, keeping in and a new building erected in its place.

Planning mind that a box for a fully extended adult is too a new building allows those of us working in the large and awkward to be safely handled. Finally, storage facility, which contains archeological and bone should be in contact only with inert organic forensic collections, to make recommendations materials. During our evaluation, we Collection Managers and Conservators. They often make Our primary goal was to identify and bal- decisions about box materials, size, durability, ance the concerns of Native Americans, the needs organization, cataloging, and registration.

Fiscal con- ological remains, it is vital to create an environ- straints related to the cost of conducting research ment that allows access, while simultaneously limit the amount of time a researcher can spend reducing damage caused by excessive handling.

The operating schedule Limited space is also a major issue. Space of a repository, the time constraints of museum constraints often require boxes to be placed or personnel, and the needs of other researchers may stacked on high shelves.

With this in mind, it is also restrict time. In Proper storage must allow for tilting, while also addition to proper organization, it is essential preventing the contents of boxes from rolling that the storage container be of adequate size.

Providing Researchers often find it frustrating to waste valu- sturdy, wide, platform-ladders is recommended to able time trying to fit an individual into a box facilitate access under such circumstances.

It is also helpful to have Keeping collections clean is yet another bones grouped together within a box. For challenge to collections managers. It is essential instance, keeping the hand bones together and to have storage containers that are made of mate- sorted by right and left sides, keeping the ribs rials that are easy to clean.

Dust tends to collect together, and keeping the vertebrae together in the best of environments, so it is good to have reduces the amount of time a researcher spends the boxes and shelves made of a material that can looking for and placing specific bones.

Grouping quickly and easily be cleaned. The box must also be durable After reviewing the needs of the various and able to support the weight of larger individu- groups interested in the long-term housing of als, yet not be so heavy that it is difficult to human remains, we designed a storage box that maneuver. We have focused on the by catalog number greatly reduces the amount of issues of size, materials, and layout. It is prefer- Size is an important aspect of box building.

If the box is a clear and understandable system that does not too large, then there is movement of material make presumptions about a researcher's interests or specific questions. Having Box without trays. Bones are a sortable electronic data- separated by base containing a biologi- foam wedges cal profile i. Physical Anthropologists.

Time constraints and accessibil- ity are two prominent concerns of physical anthropologists. This layout facili- hands as well as tates research by improving separate trays for the right and access and reducing the left feet bones. Such a layout also mini- mizes handling and reduces the amount of damage to bones. Summary The housing of human remains, regardless of cultural affiliation, is a basic issue within anthro- within the box, which is damaging to the bone. Despite the indis- storage and handling purposes.

Through contin- pensable function of a box, the issue of how to ual experimentation, we have concluded that a best create satisfactory housing has been sorely box size of 31" x 24" x 6" is the most appropriate neglected. There is a tendency to see the box as size given all the listed constraints. The box size is an easily resolved non-issue.

However, as we hope based on maximum long bone lengths of a com- we have shown, there are many issues to consider plete male as defined by Ubelaker's stature table when designing proper storage. The box we have Ubelaker, We plan to continue ommended by conservators. A corrugated poly- intercultural and interdisciplinary negotiations ethylene sheet, such as Corex, is an inert acid-free and further modify our design.

We welcome material that is reasonably priced, durable, flexi- feedback and would appreciate suggestions. To accom- modate the concerns of Native American groups, References we recommend placing a layer of well-washed Bass, William. Fourth edition. Human Skeletal Remains. Manuals contact with organic material. Second edition. Human Osteology. San Diego, California: physical anthropologists. We have compartmen- Academic Press, Below the cranium are the vertebrae and the pelvis.

Sorted ribs, hand, and foot bones are organized according to right and Illustrations drawn by Jennifer Riddle. Most U. While it would set. As a result, the professional team may be seem a natural fit, this collaboration has in fact composed primarily of research area specialists, been all too rare in field archeology in Central without individuals specifically designated to America until relatively recently. My experiences carry out coordinated research functions such as as an artifacts conservator with U.

Such a Guatemala 1 have given me an opportunity to team structure may take a cue from funding reflect on the integration process, which in these sources that only support research.

Several factors that Field preparation. The typological and appeared to affect progress are presented and chronological sequences underpinning current matched with some suggested strategies to research in Central America have typically uti- increase the level of conservation-mindedness in lized ceramics and lithics, for these are the mate- field archeology.

Although focused on the situa- rials that survive in abundance in the American tion in Central America, many of these strategies subtropics. Their relative hardiness, however, may are appropriate for excavations elsewhere, includ- have served to give archeologists a false sense of ing the United States. Conservation approaches are still not duras. Structure regularly part of an archeologists field training, 16 showing tun- nel access to either in textbooks, techniques classes, or field excavation areas.

So, it is not surprising that they might rely on out-of-date sources for stabilization solutions or reconstruction materi- als, such as molten paraffin wax or white glue, without understanding the consequences.

Conservators, meanwhile, are still often trained with a bias toward singular items deserv- ing specialized attention. This can be a limitation for a conservator working on site, who may be unaware of, choose to remain isolated from, or be ill-equipped to deal with, the full artifact inven- tory and its research needs, site preservation issues, or project information systems of which conservation records should be an integrated part.

All of the duras. Conser- Central American countries have endorsed cul- vator stabilizing basketry remains tural patrimony preservation and protection, e. The specific application of these concepts to archeological practice is generally articulated in the permit regulations, drawn up by governmen- tal authorities overseeing excavations typically a national institute within a ministry.

Currently, the regulations primarily address architectural actions, but thus far guidelines are not provided for situations necessitating conservation in situ, and curation standards for lifted artifacts are been my experience that the lessons and benefits rarely mentioned.

UNESCO specifies that a manage- ing, and reconstructing to packing away in stor- ment plan be developed, which balances the age—offers an important opportunity for dialog preservation needs of the site's cultural property, between archeologist and conservator. Because with tourism development and on-going choices made at each step have the potential to research; but it offers no direct assistance to gov- impact research value, by alterations good or ernmental authorities in formulating or imple- bad that are potentially introduced, this is a menting details of such a plan.

The primary con- for every type of material, as well as priorities for servation resource in most Central American more focused conservation attention.

Details about how an arti- museum. Since most projects lack a participating fact was processed should be part of its record, conservator, central laboratory personnel may be along with provenience and other technical brought in to provide advice when conservation observations and analysis; all of these form its issues arise in the course of excavation. Generally, research value. An integrated documentation sys- more expertise is available for architectural issues, tem, along with a well-thought-out finds process- in part because of a longer history of focus on ing system, and project documents that report this aspect and the existence of professional archi- these aspects, promote awareness of the conser- tecture programs.

Conservators of other materials vation component of responsible archeological are typically apprentice-trained, with occasional practice at a time when ethics and curation stan- access to regional workshops whose focus is dards are increasingly being discussed. A conservator approaches to ceramics conservation. As a result, brings considerable diagnostic skills to a preserva- recommendations in an archeological setting may tion problem, which include characterizing com- not be framed with regard to their impact on ponent materials, elucidating technology and rec- research priorities, and experience in dealing with ognizing traces of use in artifacts that have altered issues posed by material in situ is still limited.

This informa- Strategies to Promote Integration tion, often more extensive because specialized On-site integration. The particular issues lifting techniques were used, forms the basis of presented by archeological materials should be one of the most powerful strategies for promot- part of a conservator's training, just as conserva- ing integration on site: materials-based research tion issues should be part of an archeologist's that is carried out and published collaboratively training.

Courses and workshops may be ade- by archeologists and conservators. Conservator excavation situations—ones that could have been working in a handled differently or could be anticipated—and royal tomb thereby discover a resource network to tap.

These within Structure new opportunities increase the number of avail- Ultimately, it is the excavated materials that benefit from the integration of our work, through improved recov- ery, enriched research, safer display, and better storage, for a longer future as sources of meaning- ful information about the past.

Payson D. Robert J. Those who have experi- [Dr. William L. Fash, Harvard University], enced the benefits of such collaborations might present; Aguateca Archaeological Project, Aguateca, consider advocacy at the funder level for active Guatemala [Dr. Takeshi Inomata, University of support of conservation as part of project bud- Arizona], present. An argument could certainly be made on Examples of conservation chapters in field season research reports: Beaubien, H.

Hornbeck, and E.