Back to Three Forests Coalition Home

Moore, Rick, Roger Clark, Stephanie Achey, and Tomas Robinson. 1994. Preserving Traces of the Past: Protecting the Colorado Plateau's Archaeological Heritage. The Grand Canyon Trust, Flagstaff, AZ. 132 p

RELEVANT TO: CULTURAL RESOURCES

ROADS/OFF-ROAD VEHICLES

GRAZING

MINERALS

DESCRIPTION

This report was prepared and published by the Grand Canyon Trust to promote the preservation and protection of archaeological resources on the Colorado Plateau. It aims to provoke rethinking and revising policies and practices, and for improving coordination among agencies. It is based on i) a systematic review of literature on archaeological threats and protective measures; ii) a written survey of cultural resource management professionals and other experts in the field; and iii) in-depth phone interviews with a sample of respondents to the written survey. It describes "cultural resources" and summarizes the history of pre-Columbian cultures; impacts of modern day economic endeavors and tourism; and procedures and failings of public land management with regard to cultural resources protection. It provides extensive recommendations for overcoming shortcomings in protection. Most of the recommendations are national in scope, but many are relevant to individual Forest management.

METHOD

The report's authors reviewed "...hundreds of reports, symposia proceedings, books, and other documents pertaining to cultural resource management in general and specific to the Colorado Plateau." They also wrote to well-known experts in the field to help identify "...scores of issues and problems..." upon which they "...based a series of questions to ask of anthropologists, cultural resource managers, and other experts in the field." After several iterations, the survey was mailed to 130 professionals, 72 were returned.

MAJOR FINDINGS

• "There is no clear, collective vision regarding cultural resource management...There are countless entities operating in the region, each pursuing its own agenda. There is significant competition, as a result, for funding, resource allocation, political and public support, economic development, media attention, etc. There is also no established forum for discussion, conflict resolution, future planning, or information sharing. (Four Corners Governors Conference Report 1990)." (Executive Summary (ES) p. 2)
• The region's heritage is threatened not only by increasing vandalism and looting, but also by losses due to development such as mining, damming, grazing, road construction, and damage caused by increasing numbers of visitors. (ES p. 2)
• Less than 10 percent of the region has been surveyed for prehistoric sites and known sites are rarely monitored.
• Shrinking budgets and insufficient agency commitment have skewed priorities to the point where agencies are frequently unable to meet even minimum requirements for legal compliance.
• Survey respondents identified public education as the most critically needed element for long term protection of archeological resources. "Ironically, federal agencies allocate almost no money to this type of education." (ES p. 3)
• Rapidly increasing tourism is the greatest single threat to preserving archeological resources on the Colorado Plateau. (ES p. 4)
• "Cultural resource management issues are given only cursory treatment in most federal resource management plans." (ES p. 5)
• Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires federal agencies to take "historic properties" into account. Although Section 106 is critical to protecting some sites from or during development, meeting its requirements is the dominant archaeological consideration on Forests, preventing achievement of other important archaeological management needs. This has resulted in a variety of problems: (ES p. 6)
• Site avoidance is too often equated with preservation;
• Resource planning and management are hindered by a lack of baseline data;
• The cumulative and site-specific archaeological impacts of grazing, mining, recreation, and other uses are not understood before decisions are made;
• The lack of common database has impaired management decisions and precluded the use of modeling and other decision-making tools for protecting and preserving archeological resources;
• Time required for the administrative requirements of Section 106 compliance is exceeds its value, especially when it means other archaeological needs are not being met.
• This response from a federal employee about budgets exemplifies the problem of misappropriated funding and priorities: "It's a big joke. Compliance work done by cultural resource staff is supposed to be charged to whoever benefits from the work.... many managers find ways to avoid laying off personnel in (established) programs...by instructing cultural resource staff to code compliance work as cultural resource work." (ES p. 7)
• Without a comprehensive program to monitor impacts of logging, mining, grazing, road construction and other land uses, it is impossible to estimate their cumulative effect on the archaeological heritage.
• "The problem with looting is not here in the Four Corners area. It is in the drawing rooms of Washington, D.C., on the mantles of Boston fireplaces and on the walls of Los Angeles condominiums....Until the reaction to the private display of such artifacts is one of scorn rather than approval, those artifacts will continue to find a market. (David B. Madsen, Utah State Archaeologist 1991) (ES p. 8)
• Protection laws are rarely enforced because of too few enforcement officers, a lack of understanding and support, failure of agencies to pursue convictions, and a disinterested judicial system.
• Fragmented jurisdictions and inability to share information are fatal impediments to enforcement. (ES p. 9)
• There is a crisis in curating the millions of artifacts being legally excavated.
• Legal sale of artifacts from private lands confounds efforts to prevent sale of those stolen from public lands. (ES p. 10)
• Key recommendations: (ES p. 11-14)
• Promote education, "however agencies do not have sufficient budgets or staff with expertise in education to be effective."
• Place a higher priority on cultural resource planning and management. "agencies should secure core budgets for cultural resource management and planning and not allow the misappropriation of those budgets to pay for compliance requirements being met for other programs."
• Coordinate federal archaeological programs. "Federal agencies should establish an interagency agreement designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of efforts to protect and preserve archaeological resources on the Colorado Plateau."
• Increase funding for curation. "Congress should appropriate funds to inventory and curate existing collections, particularly those that were generated by past general government projects, such as the construction of Glen Canyon Dam."
• Improve protection of archaeological sites on private lands. "State historic preservation offices should establish a comprehensive program to work with private landowners who have archaeological sites on their lands."

QUESTIONS RAISED FOR THE THREE FORESTS

• As recreational use on the three forests increases every year, how is law enforcement to protect cultural resources going to be addressed? For instance, the law enforcement Full Time Equivalent for the entire Manti-La Sal NF is 0.8, for ALL law enforcement (information provided by Ann King to the SMU Alternative Planning Team on May 24, 2004). If the budget for enforcement is not present, will activities known to impact cultural resources continue to be permitted in the vicinity of cultural resources?
• When an area has not been surveyed for cultural sites, how does that affect permitting of activities, e.g., motorized use, livestock grazing?
• How are impacts of livestock grazing taken into account in relation to which types of cultural sites?
• Does your Forest charge compliance work to cultural resources, or to the program (e.g., Range) whose compliance is being examined?

RELEVANCE TO FOREST MANAGEMENT

• Protection of cultural sites should take precedence over resource-consumptive activities, and include a volunteer monitoring program.
• Motorized recreation and grazing may not be suitable uses in the vicinity of cultural resources; this needs to be addressed on a site-by-site or area basis.
• Compliance analyses by cultural resources staff must be charged to the program being examined for compliance.
• Cultural resources protection on the Three Forests should be designed in explicit conjunction with affected Tribes.