A

A. Photocopies: The charge for photocopies is $0.25 per page. B. Digital Images/Printing (Payment in advance is required): Type Cost 300 ppi TIFF(s) on CD-R (scan only) $7.00 each 5 x 7 print(s) on archival photo paper (scanned and printed) $8.00 each 8 x 10 print(s) on archival photo paper (scanned and printed) $9.00 each 5 x 7 print(s) on archival paper from digital image (no scan) $4.50 each 8 x 10 print(s) on archival paper from digital image (no scan) $5.50 each Source: Miss. Code §§ 39-5-1, 25-59-1 (1972, as amended). Part 3 Chapter 11: Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations and Reports in Mississippi. (Adopted by the Board of Trustees on July 23, 1999; Amended July 20, 2001) Abstract. The Mississippi Department of Archives and History (MDAH)/Mississippi State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has written more comprehensive guidelines to assist archaeologists and other individuals and institutions responsible for Section 106 and Antiquities Law compliance in the state. These guidelines address: professional qualifications, laboratory and curation facilities, treatment of human remains, terrestrial and underwater archaeological research, and report preparation. As cultural resource management laws and regulations, archaeological theory and techniques, and the public’s attitude toward cultural resources change, the document itself will evolve to reflect them. For now, however, it is hoped these guidelines will assist archaeologists and agency administrators in developing research designs that will serve to produce sufficient amounts of data to identify and evaluate cultural resources and when needed to develop and implement appropriate mitigation proposals. Introduction. The purpose of this document is to assist archaeologists, other professionals, and agency administrators involved in cultural resource management (CRM) (as defined by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended) with the development and implementation of adequate statements of objectives or research designs for archaeological investigations in Mississippi (see Schiffer and Gumerman 1977:190). MDAH-SHPO will use these guidelines when reviewing Cultural Resource Management (CRM) reports, and omissions from the procedures recommended herein may be grounds for rejecting reports or requiring further field, laboratory, or background work. However, it must be emphasized that the following guidelines are not intended as a “cookbook” or comprehensive step-by-step instruction manual governing archaeological investigations in the State of Mississippi. A variety of available literature on CRM (e.g., Bense et al. 1986), other states’ guidelines (e.g. Alabama Historical Commission 1996; Davis 1982; Georgia State Historic Preservation Office 1993; Harper and Fielder 1995; McGahey n.d.; New Jersey State Historic Preservation Office 1990; Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission 1991; South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office n.d.; Tennessee Division of Archaeology 1997; and Texas Historical Commission 1995), and requests for proposals (e.g., Bruce et al. 1998; Carr et al. 1998; Moore 1996a; 1996b) were used to develop this document and should be consulted for additional insights on how to proceed with cultural resource investigations. Other relevant documents include the Secretary of the Interior’s “Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation” and “Standards for Treatment of Archeological Properties,” the National Park Service’s “Guidelines for Recording Historic Ships,” and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s “Working with Section 106” series (see Reference Section). Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, require federal land management agencies and others receiving federal funds, licenses, or permits for land alteration projects to consider the impact of their agency’s actions on cultural resources that are located within their project’s area of potential effects. Usually this consists of identifying properties or sites, determining if they are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as well as assessing the effects of the project, if any, on the resources. How does one go about this task? According to the Section 106 implementing regulations (see 36 CFR 800), there are no specific rules governing the identification and evaluation process, only that agencies exercise a “reasonable and good faith effort” to identify all significant resources (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1986:20). While NHPA is an important management tool, agencies or individuals participating in such projects should also be in compliance with numerous other laws and regulations governing cultural resources. These include, but are not limited to: Executive Order 11593; the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended; Department of the Interior regulations 36 CFR 60, 36 CFR 63, 36 CFR 66, and 36 CFR 79; Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), and the Mississippi Antiquities Law (39-7-3 et seq. of the Mississippi Code of 1972), as amended. This document provides guidance on several topics relevant to the profession, including qualifications, curation of recovered data, treatment of human remains, terrestrial and underwater archaeological fieldwork, and report preparation. However, those required to conduct cultural resource investigations should consider the relevant legislation and scopes of work governing the action as the primary source of information on how to proceed, not this document. Projects of different levels require differing stages of cultural resource investigation. For our purposes, terrestrial and underwater archaeologists utilize three basic phases of research: Phase I-cultural resources survey; Phase II-site testing and evaluation; and Phase III-mitigation. Each of these phases, primarily Phases II and III, should be approached within the context of a research design that will contribute to a better knowledge and understanding of Mississippi’s past. During Phase I investigations qualified archaeologists locate archaeological sites through a variety of survey techniques and remote-sensing technologies. For the purposes of these guidelines, archaeological sites are defined as physical locations containing concentrations or spatial clustering of data, such as artifacts, ecofacts, and features, produced or modified by humans (Ashmore and Sharer 1988:219; Thomas 1989:649). These locations may be prehistoric, historic, or both, as well as on land (terrestrial) or underwater. Phase I survey techniques may include visual surface examination, subsurface shovel testing and screening, or a combination of both. The techniques and remote-sensing technologies employed during the survey and the amount of research conducted (sampling) are dependent upon numerous factors (e.g., project size and accessibility, terrestrial or underwater locations). Each factor should receive equal consideration when developing a survey strategy, keeping in mind that each situation is unique, and that the research design should be flexible and adaptable as the situation necessitates. Once an archaeological site has been located, archaeologists need to define its boundaries, identify the possible effects of the proposed project on the site, and determine whether additional investigations are necessary to determine National Register eligibility. If, as a result of Phase I investigations, a site’s eligibility status remains unknown or undetermined and it will be affected, additional investigations will be required. Phase II research then begins to assess the nature and integrity of the cultural deposits. Testing techniques may involve controlled surface collecting, limited underwater diving, the excavation of test units (e.g., 1x1 meter, 2x2 meter), deep soil core sampling, and mechanized trenching, all dependent upon the situation. These techniques should adequately sample the site and generate sufficient data, enabling the archaeologist to determine if the property is eligible for inclusion in the National Register. Sampling strategies and testing techniques employed during this phase of research should consider a variety of factors, such as site size, location, disturbance, accessibility, and artifact density and distribution. Each factor should receive equal consideration when developing a testing strategy, keeping in mind that each situation is unique, and that the research design should be flexible and adaptable as the situation necessitates. National Register Bulletins 15 (How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation), 16A (How to Complete the National Register Registration Form), 20 (Nominating Historic Vessels and Shipwrecks to the National Register of Historic Places), and 36 (Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Historical Archeological Sites and Districts) provide additional information to archaeologists and agencies charged with determining site eligibility. Copies of all National Register Bulletins can be obtained by writing the: National Register of Historic Places U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service P.O. Box 37127, Washington D.C. 20013-7127. Additionally, archaeologists and agency administrators may also want to consult the 1995 supplement to CRM, volume 18, no. 6, that provides several relevant articles on the National Register and archaeology. The last phase of archaeological research is Phase III-mitigation. Once a property has been determined eligible for the National Register by the archaeologist and SHPO, the archaeologist must make recommendations to the site’s management agency or landowner on how to preserve the data contained in the site. The first option should involve redesigning the project in hopes of avoiding the eligible property altogether. However, if project modification is not an option, then the archaeologist will need to create a research design that preserves the significant data through retrieval, reporting, and curation. The archaeological techniques selected for this action are dependent upon numerous factors, including the specifics of what makes the site significant, and should be outlined in a Memorandum of Agreement. The following sections will elaborate on these phases of investigations.