|
U.S. Department
of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Report
Meeting of
the Preservation Board
Boise, Idaho
June 4-6, 2002
Agenda. The Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Preservation
Board held its tenth regular meeting on June 4-6, 2002, in Boise,
Idaho. The meeting agenda is appended as pages 6 and 7 of this
report. Cultural resource information and management decisions
in Resource Management Plans were the meeting's predominant focus.
Attendees. Ex-officio Board
members in attendance were acting Preservation Officer Marilyn
Nickels and Deputy Preservation Officers (DPO) Bob King (AK),
Gary Stumpf (AZ), Russ Kaldenberg (CA), Dan Haas (CO), Troy Ferone
(ES), Stan McDonald (ID), Gary Smith (MT), Pat Barker (NV), Stephen
Fosberg (NM), Richard Hanes (OR), Garth Portillo (UT), and Tim
Nowak (WY). The Board's 6 term members, managers Roberta Moltzen
(MT), Greg Thomsen (CA), Gail Acheson (AZ), and Sue Richardson
(OR), and specialists Kirk Halford (CA) and Carol Anne Murray
(WY), also attended. It was the final meeting for term members
Moltzen, Thomsen, and Halford.
Also present as an observer was Dr.
Robin Burgess, currently Cultural Resource Manager for the Air
Mobility Command of the U.S. Air Force, who will be assuming the
role of Preservation Officer and Chair of the Board on July 14,
2002. Several staff from the Washington Office and from State
Offices were present to facilitate specific topics on the Board
agenda.
Welcome. Mike Ferguson, Acting
State Director for Idaho, welcomed the Board to Boise and expressed
his support for the importance of the topics which the Board had
chosen to address, especially Planning and Off Highway Vehicle
challenges.
Board discussions and followup
actions
Land Use Planning. Copies were
distributed of the newly signed Information Bulletin (IB No. 2002-101,
5/29/2002), "Cultural Resource Considerations in Resource
Management Plans."
The Board discussed ways in which
to enhance the guidance in this IB at the State level. Contributing
to the discussion was Gary Wyke, Planner, in the Idaho State Office.
Action: The Board agreed
to place on the intranet Web site a copy of this IB, plus three
items Gary Stumpf had brought to the meeting – helpful
guidelines for field staffs to use in preparing Resource Management
Plans (RMPs) and plan amendments:
• Cultural Heritage Issues in Land Use Planning: What to
Do, What to Do?
• Sample Summary of Planning Issues and Objectives for
Cultural Resources, Agua Fria National Monument and Bradshaw
Foothills Planning Area
• Examples of Poorly-Written Objectives and Management
Actions/ Good Goals, Objectives and Management Actions
The first two items were authored
by Connie Stone, field archaeologist for Agua Fria National Monument
(and former term member of the Board), and Gary Stumpf had circulated
the last item at an earlier date, with comments supplied by John
Douglas.
Several Deputy Preservation Officers
suggested that the second item could be broadened by examples
from States dealing with other planning issues such as energy
development. Action: Deputy Preservation Officers agreed to provide
examples to be added to the Web site in the next several months.
Action: Finally, Marilyn Nickels
offered to brief the Washington Office Planning and Community
Support Group, the Land and Minerals Directorate, and the National
Landscape Conservation System Office on the goals reflected in
the results of the Board's deliberations. In addition, if the
Planning Group wishes a briefing for the weekly conference call
with State planning leads, she will conduct that also.
Landscape Level Overviews (Analyses).
After some discussion of the term "landscape," which
has been questioned by some field specialists, the Board agreed
to continue using the term to describe these analyses of existing
cultural resource data, since it has a useful meaning in planning
contexts. The geographic scope and level of detail of these overviews
should be left flexible, depending upon the nature of the planning
effort in question and the type of area/resources to be addressed.
These studies are roughly equivalent to Class I overviews, but
perhaps at differing scales and with some new tools.
The Board agreed that the most important
product out of these efforts is a GIS layer or set of layers which
analyze and display cultural resources in conjunction with other
resources and uses proposed for the planning area. Helping field
archaeologists figure out how to write scopes of work for conducting
these studies, plus how to interface with contractors who may
conduct them, and how to use the results effectively in the planning
effort, are the greatest needs. Action: Board members agreed to
supply what examples they have of good scopes of work, to put
on the intranet Web site in the next several months.
Finally, it was suggested that we
should develop an easy-to use GIS tool to help field archaeologists
produce "sensitivity maps" for planning areas, which
would summarize information on cultural resources from the above
analyses. Action: Kirk Halford volunteered to work with Dan Martin
of the Washington Office on this tool before the next Board meeting.
Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Management.
With the input of Bill Gibson, Arizona OHV Coordinator, and Terry
Heslin, Idaho OHV Coordinator, the Board discussed cultural resource
issues in OHV management. The most urgent issue is cultural resource
implications for the route designations required to be done in
Resource Management Plans. After much discussion, it was agreed
that the level of data needed for defining closed, open and limited
OHV use areas in planning is more general than the data needed
to complete actual route designations, whether those are done
during the RMP process or at a later stage.
In addition, the Board agreed that
groups applying for permits for major events, such as races, should
be required pay for the inventory needed to complete BLM compliance
with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA),
just as applicants for other authorized uses do. This should be
viewed as cost recovery.
Since the OHV issues are complex,
with further guidance needed to govern the various stages of OHV
designation and implementation, a team was formed to develop further
recommendations. The team includes Russ Kaldenberg, Pat Barker,
Kirk Halford, Bob King, Terry Heslin and Bill Gibson. Action:
The team will draft recommendations by September 15, 2002, for
final presentation at the next Board meeting in December.
Budget. The Board heard an
update of the latest activities in budget development and implementation
from Richard Brook of the Washington Office. After some discussion
about the strengths and weaknesses of the Management Information
System (MIS) and the Budget Planning System (BPS) in capturing
needs and accountability related to cultural resource management
priorities, the Board agreed to work with Richard to supply him
with additional information to supplement what can be gleaned
from the above systems. Roberta Moltzen indicated that the Field
Committee addresses these issues as well, and that they could
be a forum for improvement. Marilyn Nickels indicated that it
is the goal of the Washington Office to support priorities as
established by States wherever possible, particularly with regard
to Challenge Cost Share projects, which often reflect long-standing
partnerships at the local level.
Action: Dan Martin requested
that the Board members submit pictures and narratives for posting
on the Internet Web page section on the FY2002 Resources at Risk
projects. This will help the public follow the progress of restoring
and protecting specific areas which have received funding this
year.
Workforce Planning. Richard
Brook has been tracking this issue on the Washington Office staff.
Roberta Moltzen reported that a Field Committee subcommittee has
developed a template to use for this exercise, under the new administration.
It will be available for review shortly. The deadline for completing
plans is a short one for all bureaus.
The Board discussed how best to assist
field offices in ensuring adequate consideration of cultural resource
management staffing needs in the future. Action: A committee was
formed which will meet in the next few months to analyze this
issue and make recommendations. The committee members are Pat
Barker, Gary Smith, Steve Fosberg, Sue Richardson, and Carol Anne
Murray. Richard Brook agreed as a staff person to make arrangements
and provide Washington Office liaison on this committee.
Action: Steve Fosberg offered
to send the Board some background materials he had developed for
past efforts in workforce planning.
Programmatic Agreement/Board Charter/Operating
Rules. Marilyn Nickels began this discussion by clarifying
some issues related to the nature of the Programmatic Agreement.
These have arisen especially since the new 36 CFR 800 regulations
have been implemented. The main question is whether any changes
need to be made in the national PA or in State protocols in the
light of the new regulations. Marilyn explained that the appropriate
method for making changes in BLM's procedures, if any are needed,
would be as revisions to the manuals, which under the Programmatic
Agreement are acknowledged as BLM's principal method for complying
with the National Historic Preservation Act. John Douglas, as
a rehired annuitant, will be working with Robin Burgess to put
the interim manuals in final in the next few months, and can consider
any recommendations for change.
The Board next took up the subject
of changes to the Board's Charter and Operating Rules. No changes
were recommended except to delete #9 of the Operating Rules, "Issues
outside the purview of the Board," since any issue related
to historic preservation is within the purview of the Board. Action:
It was also agreed that the Chair should develop some clearer
definition of the roles of the facilitator and note taker, particularly
regarding meeting minutes and follow up.
Miscellaneous Topics.
Action: The Board recommended
that an interest announcement be sent out from the Washington
Office as soon as possible for recruiting term members for the
Board. They also thanked Greg Thomsen and Kirk Halford for their
invaluable contributions to historic preservation. Roberta Moltzen,
who had been unable to attend meetings during her tenure until
this one, agreed to serve another term. However, since the meeting
she has accepted a new position with the Forest Service and will
be unable to do so.
Action: Board members were
urged to provide comments on the manuals between now and July,
when Robin Burgess and John Douglas will be working on them. Action:
John promised that he would set a date by July 1, 2002, for a
meeting of the volunteer task force to revise the 8160-1 Handbook
on Tribal Coordination and Consultation.
Action: Dan Martin asked all
Board members to review the Cultural Resource Use Permit System
(CRUPS) on the intranet Web site. The system, with any necessary
revisions, should be ready for the Board's approval at the December
2002 meeting.
The Board agreed to go forward with
a two-day BLM meeting prior to the Society for American Archaeology
(SAA) meeting in Milwaukee in 2003. Action: A committee was formed
to plan the meeting. The members are Troy Ferone, Tim Nowak and
Carol Anne Murray. Tim provides continuity with the team that
planned the very successful BLM meeting prior to the 2002 SAA
meeting in Denver. The committee will report its progress at the
December meeting.
The Board briefly discussed the outcome
of the Weatherman Draw project, where the Anschutz Investment
Company has transferred its oil and gas lease to the National
Trust for Historic Preservation, after considerable objection
by tribes and preservation organizations against Anschutz's drilling
plans. This project raises the issue of how to deal with sensitive
areas adequately before leases are offered for sale. Marilyn distributed
an Instruction Memorandum issued on May 23, 2002 (IM No. 2002-174,
Oil and Gas Leasing Stipulations), containing a standard stipulation
to address Endangered Species Act considerations at the leasing
stage. Action: The Board agreed to put this with other energy
issues on the December agenda.
Field Trip. Stan McDonald,
Idaho DPO, John Sullivan, manager of the Snake River Birds of
Prey National Conservation Area (NCA), and several field office
staff members hosted the Board on a field trip on June 6. The
Board visited interpreted segments of the Oregon Trail, the Snake
River Birds of Prey NCA; Swan Lake Dam, a National Historic Landmark;
and Celebration Park, Idaho's only park dedicated to prehistoric
archaeology.
Next Board Meeting
The next meeting of the Board will
be held December 3-5, 2002, in Alexandria, Virginia. Among suggested
agenda topics were museum collections and Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act implementation, energy initiatives,
OHV committee report, Budget, and heritage tourism. Next June's
meeting (June 3-6, 2003) will be held in Casper, Wyoming.
Submitted June 18, 2002,
by Marilyn Nickels, Acting Preservation Officer,
on behalf of the Preservation Board.
Preservation Board
Meeting, Boise
AGENDA
Tuesday, June 4,
2002
8:30 - 9:00 Welcome: Mike Ferguson,
Acting State Director, Idaho
and Introductions
9:00 - 9:15 Housekeeping/Meeting Logistics
Planning and Cultural Resources
9:15 - 11:30 Resource Management Planning
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
Examples of Cultural Resources input into Land Use Planning (Gary
Stumpf)
Examples of Goals, Objectives and Management Actions for cultural
resources. Discuss public scoping strategies.
Purpose of Discussion: To look at
different types of input into land use planning. What does the
Preservation Board recommend should and should not be included
in Land Use Plans and how does the Preservation Board get this
direction to the Field? Develop standards or specifications that
RMPs and landscape overviews would meet as we follow the guidance
in the IM on planning. Develop strategies for public scoping.
Status report on the Draft IB "Cultural Resources Considerations
in Resource Management Plans" (2/27/02). Are there any modifications/revisions
that are necessary?
11:30- 1:00 Lunch
1:00 - 3:00 Landscape Level Overviews
in the Planning Process (All)
Discuss the types of data that are being used and the kinds of
products that are currently being produced in the planning process.
Purpose of Discussion: Should general
standards for products related to planning be developed? If so,
create a list of products and concepts for landscape level overviews.
How should this list be delivered to the Field?
3:00-5:00 Off Highway Vehicle (OHV)
Use, Cultural Resources and Planning (All). Bill Gibson, AZSO,
OHV Coordinator and Terry Heslin, IDSO, OHV Coordinator will attend
this portion of the meeting.
Discuss what the cultural program should be doing in relationship
to OHV use. Share examples of successful ways in which OHV activities
are being dealt with in your State.
Purpose of Discussion: Determine what
levels of inventory are needed and when for this activity. Determine
where the program needs to get involved into the planning process
for OHV activities and how. Develop strategies to coordinate with
State Office OHV specialists.
Wednesday, June 5, 2002
8:30 - 8:45 Housekeeping/Meeting Logistics
8:45 - 10:45 Setting Budget Priorities
and the Budget Planning System (Richard Brook, All)
Discuss how to make links between the data that is entered in
BPS to what appears in final budget justifications and subsequent
efforts to prepare PTAs.
Purpose of Discussion: Determine how
to use BPS to update priority strategic plan projects and WO requests
for Challenge Cost Share Projects and "At-Risk" projects.
Identify ways to build coalitions to increase cultural funding
within the BPS system.
10:45 - 11:30 Workforce Management Planning (Marilyn Nickels)
11:30 - 1:00 Lunch
1:00 - 3:00 Preservation Board Charter,
Operating Rules, etc. (Marilyn Nickels)
Review and discuss the Preservation Board Charter and the Board's
Operating Rules/Principles. Review meeting structure and effectiveness.
Discuss legal issues pertaining to the National Programmatic Agreement
and State Protocols.
Purpose of Discussion: Identify if
the Charter and Operating Rules need to be revised. Determine
how and when the revisions will be made. Evaluate meeting effectiveness
and list ideas on how to change or make future meetings better.
3:00 - 4:00 Miscellaneous topics/updates/information
updates (Weatherman Draw, International Collaborative efforts,
Manual updates, etc.)
4:00-4:45 Meeting Close-out (upcoming
board vacancies, December meeting logistics and agenda, conference
call date and time, etc.) (Linda Clark)
|
