A06_Attachment_4_BLM_AZ_cultural_interim_standards.pdf

BLM-Arizona Interim Standards and Guidelines for Consultants:

Existing Data Review, Field Survey, Site Documentation and National

Register Eligibility Recommendations Revision date: June 24, 2021

Introduction

This document provides interim standards and guidelines for inventorying and evaluating cultural resources on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or affected by Bureau actions in Arizona. Its purpose is to ensure the use of consistent, statewide inventory and evaluation procedures and to provide guidance for the proper recording and maintenance of cultural resource data. This document supplements guidance found in Bureau Manual 8110, Identifying Cultural Resources, Arizona State Museum (ASM) Archaeological Site Recording Manual, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) survey report standards.

As required by the BLM Cultural Resources Use Permits, the BLM Arizona’s expectation of consultants regarding cultural resource inventory and evaluation is:

• Maintain consistent communication with the appropriate BLM archaeologist throughout the project.

• Conduct thorough existing data reviews referencing all available sources prior to fieldwork.

• Conduct quality field surveys led by archaeologists who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards.

• Evaluate cultural resources according to the National Register criteria and National Register Bulletin 15.

• Conduct condition assessments to ascertain if a resource retains integrity as the basis for management recommendations.

• Identify and complete site records according to the ASM Archaeological Site Recording Manual.

• Record geospatial data according to the BLM National Cultural Resource Data Management Standard (NCRDMS).

• Complete an inventory report that meets or exceeds the SHPO survey report standards.

• When in doubt about anything, consult the appropriate BLM archaeologist.

Existing Data Review Minimum Standards

At a minimum, inventory efforts for compliance purposes must be sufficient to identify potentially significant cultural resources (i.e., cultural resources potentially eligible for the National Register) within the Area of Potential Effects. The level of inventory and field methodology should be commensurate with the number and kinds of cultural properties known or expected to occur, the specific environmental conditions in the area to be inventoried, and the nature of the proposed land use activity.

The main objective of an existing data review is to understand of the nature, density, and distribution of cultural resources, and the natural settings where the various known kinds of cultural resources might be expected to occur or not to occur within the study area, based on present information. Existing cultural resource information must be reviewed for all undertakings at a level commensurate with the size and nature of the proposed action. This includes review of Class I Regional Overviews and appropriate historic contexts and checking site record files to determine whether previous inventories were conducted, and sites recorded within or near the Area of Potential Effects. Ethnographic literature should also be reviewed to identify potential places of traditional cultural importance to Native Americans or other cultural groups.

Existing data reviews should analyze an area that is buffered one mile surrounding the study area (regardless of land jurisdiction), or a half-mile buffer on both sides of the centerline for liner study areas (regardless of land jurisdiction). Please consult the appropriate BLM archaeologist to discuss any deviations of analysis areas.

Field Survey Minimum Standards

1. Survey transects should be compass or GPS-controlled and will not exceed 20-meter spacing unless otherwise stated.

a. GPS or other methods should be used for quality assurance purposes to assure that the appropriate survey acreage is thoroughly surveyed and there are no gaps in survey coverage.

2. If surveying in the winter months at higher altitudes, consultant will contact the local BLM archaeologist and/or contracting officer’s representative for approval to survey in snowy conditions.

a. Failure to contact appropriate BLM archaeologist regarding ground visibility may result in a request to re-survey portions of the project acreage.

3. Level of effort to relocate previously documented cultural resources:

a. Consultants are expected to relocate all previously documented cultural resources.

If cultural resources are not relocated:

i. Expand search radius around supposed coordinates several hundred meters.

ii. Consider datum conversions (i.e., the offset between NAD 1927 and

1983). Usually, NAD 1927 to 1983 conversion errors result in approximately 200-m south of the original Northing, and approximately 50-m east of the original Easting.

iii. Contact local Field Office archaeologists before going into field regarding their knowledge of the site locations.

iv. Use photographs or other documentation to locate sites based on topography or major landmarks.

b. If site cannot be relocated, thoroughly document the effort exerted by the field crews and the steps taken to relocate. The SHPO will ask the BLM, so we are asking you, the consultant.

i. Provide some explanation as to why the site cannot be relocated.

1. For instance, perhaps site was misplotted originally. Or perhaps the site has since been buried or obscured by heavy vegetation growth, etc.

Site Documentation Standards

4. Use the ASM Site Recording Manual for guidance on filling out the ASM site cards.

5. Use the ASM revised site definition policy:

a. Physical remains of past human activity are at least 50 years old.

b. 30+ artifacts of a single class (e.g., 30 sherds, 30 lithics, 30 tin cans) within and area 15 meters (50 feet) in diameter, except when all pieces appear to originate from a single source (i.e., once ceramic pot, one core, one glass bottle).

c. 20+ artifacts which include at least 2 classes of artifact types (i.e., sherds, groundstone, nails, glass) within an area 15 meters (50 feet) in diameter.

d. One or more archaeological features in temporal association with any number of artifacts.

e. Two or more temporally associated archaeological features without artifacts.

f. Isolated features are defined as a feature that does not have any other features within a 100-meter (325 feet) diameter (e.g., isolated rock piles, mine shafts, prospecting pits, or unidentified depressions without artifact associations.

6. All previously documented historic properties within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) will be visited and a site update performed. If a revisited site does not appear as originally recorded (artifact density or distribution has changed significantly, new features are observed, site condition has changed significantly, etc.) a full re-record must be performed. A full re-record is defined as:

a. ASM Site Card completed

i. Procedures and quality standards for ASM Site Cards must conform to the

ASM Site Recording Manual and the most current SHPO Reporting Standards. Both documents can be downloaded here:

1. http://www.statemuseum.arizona.edu/crservices/forms.shtml

b. Plan view drawing/map of the site

c. Plan view drawing/map of structures and prominent features http://www.statemuseum.arizona.edu/crservices/forms.shtml

d. Photographic documentation

e. Site location map with site plotted on a USGS 7.5’ quadrangle at 1:24,000 scale.

f. An assessment of the site’s current condition

g. A recommendation of site’s National Register of Eligibility

7. Plan view drawings / maps should minimally include:

a. Site boundary that depicts the geographic extent of surficial material remains

i. Site boundary depicted on plan view drawing should have an accompanying GIS polygon shape file (i.e., the two should be the same)

1. Produced on metric 1/10” grid paper.

ii. Site datum (NAD 1983 Zone 12N)

iii. Point-provenience for diagnostic artifacts

iv. Location(s) of features and structures

v. Location of artifact concentration

vi. Location of artifact sampling or testing units.

vii. Location of photographic points

viii. Location of old growth vegetation or tree species (e.g., Saguaro, old growth ponderosa, etc.)

ix. Location of drainage(s) within or near site or any other natural areas of erosion

x. Location(s) of human-caused impacts (e.g., modern campfires rings, off-road vehicle tracks, modern trash, collector’s piles, unauthorized excavations, any evidence of human visitation).

xi. Location of other impacts such as cattle trailing or de-vegetated areas.

xii. Contour lines

xiii. Existing roads or trails

xiv. Date, scale text, scale bar, north arrow, site number, project name, site recorders, legend of symbols

b. For a site located in flat, barren, non-descript areas, draw two or more arrows on the map depicting distance and azimuth from the datum to major markers on the landscape such as named topographic features, roads, power lines, campgrounds, washes, etc. For example, “Face Mountain 245 meters at 185˚ or County Road 18 600 meters at 45˚.”

8. Structures or prominent features should be mapped at a larger scale in a separate drawing using the Cartesian grid method (x and y coordinates plotted with metric reel tapes) or GPS units with submeter accuracy. Structure or feature plan view drawings will minimally include:

i. Mapping datum

ii. Point-provenience for diagnostics artifacts

iii. Location(s) of human-caused impacts (e.g., modern trash, collector’s piles, unauthorized excavations)

iv. Date, scale text, scale bar, north arrow, site number, project name, site recorders, legend of symbols

9. Photographic documentation at each site will minimally include:

a. Site overview from a minimum of two locations.

i. Site overview photographs should contain pin flags to illustrate the distribution of artifacts.

ii. Site overview photographs should be framed in such a way that prominent land features (e.g., distant mountain peaks, mesas, rock out crops, old growth vegetation, major drainages, or arroyos) are included within the view. This technique facilitates relocation of the site for future archaeological investigations.

iii. Site overview photographs should include a north arrow; photo board is advisable.

b. Features and Structures should be photographed:

i. From a minimum of two views:

1. Include a close-up that depicts details.

a. Try to document details that relate to National Register eligibility and illustrates the structure or feature’s ability to convey integrity of workmanship, materials, or design.

2. Include a contextual overview photograph.

a. Try to document elements that relate to National Register eligibility and illustrate the structure or feature’s ability to convey integrity of setting, location, association, or feeling.

ii. Photographs of features and structures should be framed in such a way that prominent land features (e.g., distant mountain peaks, mesas, rock out crops, old growth vegetation, major drainages, or arroyos) are included within the view. This technique facilitates relocation of the features and structures for future archaeological investigations.

iii. Photographs of structures and features should include a photo board and a north arrow, or the consultant may use technology to accomplish the same result.

c. For cultural resources that are considered Not Eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, try to photographically document:

i. Evidence that the site does not convey integrity of location, design, setting, feeling, materials, workmanship, or association that supports a Not Eligible recommendation.

ii. Evidence of impacts (human and natural) that support a Not Eligible recommendation.

iii. Note: While this might seem like a big ask, Not Eligible determinations of eligibility are subjected to the most scrutiny by SHPO, Tribes, and other consulting parties. The BLM requires ample justification for Not Eligible determinations for compliance purposes.

d. Photographic log

i. Each photograph must be listed on a photographic log that describes:

1. Photographic identification number

2. Description of the photograph

3. Direction of photograph

4. Date and time

5. Light conditions

a. Full sun, partly cloudy, full overcast

6. Relevant site information (site number, feature, or structure number)

7. Photographer’s name

10. Site location maps

a. Each cultural resource will include a site location map that depicts:

i. The location of the site on a USGS 7.5’ Quadrangle at 1:24,000 scale

ii. A legend that communicates to the reader:

1. Site number

2. Name of Quadrangle

3. Datum (Should be NAD 1983 Zone 12)

4. County

5. Township, Range, Section

6. Contour interval

7. North arrow

8. Scale text

9. Scale bar

10. Date map was made

11. Name or initials of person who made the map

iii. Disclosure of site location prohibited disclaimer in Bold Font on all accompanying maps and cover pages:

1. “For Official Use Only. Disclosure of site location prohibited (43

CFR 7.18)”.

11. Site condition assessment

a. Specify all sources of disturbance observed on the site.

b. If the physical evidence is localized, as in potholes or arroyo cuts, include this information on the site plan view drawing.

c. Describe the observations on site condition in the site description narrative.

d. Disturbance sources:

i. Wind erosion. Indicate whether or not the site has been subject to significant wind erosion (e.g., dune blowouts or “lag” artifact scatters).

ii. Water erosion. Indicate whether the site has been subject to significant water erosion (e.g., arroyo cutting or sheet washing).

iii. Bioturbation. Indicate if burrowing rodents, birds, insects have disturbed subsurface deposits.

iv. Grazing. Indicate whether there is evidence of grazing impacts (trailing, wallow areas, crushed or displaced artifacts, etc.) by domestic or feral livestock (cattle, sheep, goats, horses, etc.) or other large non-domestic game such as deer, elk, or antelope.

v. Fire. Indicate whether the site has sustained impacts from wild land fire, wild land fire suppression efforts, or prescribed burning.

vi. Vandalism. Indicate any evidence of malicious behavior such as unauthorized excavations, graffiti, or other incidents where cultural material remains have been intentionally destroyed or defaced.

vii. Construction/Land development. Indicate if construction or land development (including BLM activities such as timber cutting, road, or trail maintenance) activities have damaged the site.

viii. Recreation / Motorized impacts. Indicate whether there are any impacts attributed to off-road motorized vehicles (ATVs, UTVs, motorcycles etc.), camping, or recreational shooting activities. Observe and document impacts such as displaced artifacts, crushing of artifacts, damage to features or architectures, rutting, or the creation of hardened user-created roads or paths. Observe and document signs of human visitation such as the creation of modern campfire rings within site, creation of a hardened campsite, modern trash, or spent ammunition.

e. Discuss whether the site retains any of the aspects of integrity that convey the site’s significance for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (See

NRB15).

i. Location

ii. Design

iii. Setting

iv. Feeling

v. Association

vi. Materials

vii. Workmanship

National Register eligibility recommendations

Consultants will evaluate each site for its National Register eligibility and make a professional quality recommendation to the BLM. Consultants will follow the guidelines and procedures described in National Register Bulletin 15 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.

12. At a minimum, consultant National Register recommendations will contain the following three components:

a. Theme (e.g., Mormon expansion)

b. Location (e.g., St. George basin)

c. Time period (e.g., late 19th century)

i. Insufficient recommendations may be rejected by BLM and returned to the consultant.

13. For eligibility recommendations, the following types of cultural resources, provided they are 50 years old or older, and clearly retain integrity, may be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places:

i. Properties with clear evidence for the presence of structures (historic structures, pueblos, pithouses, field houses, etc.).

ii. Properties with hundreds of surface artifacts (provided it is not a single episode can dump).

iii. Properties with clearly visible evidence of in-tact subsurface deposits.

iv. Properties that clearly meet the National Register listing requirements in

State historic contexts, or SHPO-approved BLM-level historic contexts.

b. Evaluate each cultural resource site and make a recommendation regarding its eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP using all criteria listed in 36 CFR 60.6, Department of the Interior National Register Bulletin 15.

i. To reiterate, sites should be evaluated within their historic contexts, which should include time, location, and theme.

ii. The SHPO has many Arizona thematic studies that may serve as historic contexts for NRHP evaluation located here: Arizona Thematic Studies | Arizona State Parks (azstateparks.com).

iii. Contact the appropriate BLM archaeologist about relevant historic contexts.

https://azstateparks.com/arizona-thematic-studies https://azstateparks.com/arizona-thematic-studies