Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Kansas. Mr. TAYLOR. Doctor, let me ask you one more question. I am concerned about the aspects of this legislation applying to federally assisted programs, hospitals, maybe vocational education facilities, technical training schools, and so forth, which are locally owned and locally controlled and in the main locally financed with some Federal help. Would you object to taking that aspect out of the bill? I see a great amount of difficulty when Uncle Sam starts stopping the construction of a school in some particular county which the home folks in the main have planned to build. Dr. THOMPSON. Well, I would prefer, sir, that we maintain the broad mandate that is expressed in the current legislation, although I recognize the problem that you indicate. In many of those cases it is true that the primary support is local. Yet, by having the legislation as it currently reads, we would have the opportunity which we currently do not have to work with the people involved at an advanced stage of their planning to achieve a local compromise. Many of us in our institutions have cooperative programs with various Federal agencies and in fact the States do contribute, and cities and counties also, a great deal to the salvage archeological programs. Private citizens contribute a great deal. And by having the mandate as broad as it is, we would have a moral pressure, let us say, that would make it possible for us to open up the channels of communication. A climate of discussion would be made possible with the many different kinds of agencies right down to the lowest possible level, State and local. Mr. TAYLOR. And if you get a federally guaranteed loan to build a house it would apply to my individual property. Dr. THOMPSON. Yes, sir; but remember that we also are working with the citizen on a day-to-day basis and we cannot afford to destroy the kind of rapport that we have with local citizens by trying to insist that we are going to try to get the 1 percent of this guy's-of your loan, for example. Mr. TAYLOR. Do you know of any losses that have occurred in recent years because we did not have such a program applying to federally assisted projects? Dr. THOMPSON, Yes, sir. Some of the greatest losses that have taken place in the Nation have occurred in federally assisted projects rather than federally funded, and this particularly applies to land leveling activities in various parts of the country, particularly, I think, in the Middle South and in the Mississippi Valley, but also in Arizona where land is leveled for irrigation purposes. Huge tracts of land are completely modified by programs where there is Federal assistance to the extent of guaranteeing a loan or some such program as that. For example, in the Lower Colorado River Valley in the last year, over 50,000 acres of land were leveled under a federally assisted program for agricultural development without any archeological salvage whatsoever. This program is planned to continue over the next 5 years such that almost all of the unmodified land still existent in the Lower Colorado River Valley will be destroyed as far as archeological potential is concerned, during that period of time. Mr. TAYLOR. Well, let me state you are very, very knowledgeable in this field and your testimony has been very helpful. Dr. THOMPSON. Thank you, sir. Mr. TAYLOR. I, too, am sympathetic toward the legislation and the objectives, but I am concerned with some of the details. Does the gentleman from Michigan have any questions? Mr. RUPPE. No questions. Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Kansas. Mr. SKUBITZ. It occurs to me to ask that with the vast expansion of the program here proposed, are there enough archeologists in the country to carry out this research? Dr. THOMPSON. Well, that is a potential problem, although the level of activity within the program that I have already cited to you, for example, a potential $6.5 million of expenditure in the near future is in large measure based upon the present capacity of the professional archeological community to respond to the Secretary of the Interior in carrying out the provisions of the act. Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you very much, Doctor. Dr. THOMPSON. Thank you, sir. (Dr. Thompson's statement follows:) STATEMENT OF DR. RAYMOND H. THOMPSON, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOCIETY FOR AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege to urge the passage of H.R. 6257 on behalf of the nearly 4,000 members of the Society for American Archaeology and in the name of my friend and colleague in Arizona, Dr. Charles C. Di Peso, Director of the Amerind Foundation and President of the Society who is at this time representing the Society and the archaeologists of our country at the International Congress of Americanists in Rome, Italy. The Society for American Archaeology counts among its members not only most of the professional archaeologists of the nation but also many citizens with an avocational interest in archaeology. The membership of the Society and of many affiliated state and regional organizations considers the passage of H.R. 6257 to be of utmost importance to the preservation, recovery, and interpretation of the archaeological resources of the United States. The Society, because of its concern for archaeological problems at the national level, sees H.R. 6257 as an important contribution to the development of a system for providing not only funding but also planning on a national scale. The 1960 legislation which this bill amends provides for only partial protection for the non-renewable archaeological and historic resources of the nation. The enormously increased pace of economic and technological development of recent years and the increased participation of many federal agencies and programs in these developments has led to considerable destruction of the nations heritage from the past and a major threat to the evidence of the past that remains. With the passage of this amendment, all federal agencies will have authorization to spend their own project funds as they begin to do a more effective job of meeting their responsibilities under the Federal Antiquities Act of 1906, the National Historic Sites Act of 1935, The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and Executive Order 11593. The desire of the Congress in developing this long series of legislation concerning the nation's archaeological and historic resources has in large measure been thwarted because lack of consistent funding has led to temporary, Dr. Thompson is Director of the Arizona State Museum, Professor of Anthropology and Head of the Department, University of Arizona and Chairman of the Arizona Historical Advisory Commission. He has served as a member of the Executive Committee and as Editor of the Society for American Archaeology. piecemeal, and intermittent programs rather than long range, coordinated, and carefully planned efforts. H.R. 6257 provides the authorization and mechanisms for the needed improvements. It will help diminish the emergency and ad hoc character of much of our present work and will provide the Secretary of the Interior with the necessary information to formulate more satisfactory national policy concerning the management of the threatened resources in archaeology and history, The Secretary of the Interior has pointed the way to what the Society believes is an effective national policy concept by designating the National Park Service as the coordinating and review agency for federal programs in archaelogical resource conservation under the provision of the National Environmental Policy Act and Executive Order 11593. The existing expertize and experience of the National Park Service in the planning and implementation of Congressional mandates concerning our dwindling archaeological resources provide the basis for developing the national outlook toward archaeological salvage and conservation that the Society wishes to encourage. The National Park Service should continue the program of interagency agreements whereby it carries out archaelogical work for agencies that request such help. Both the resulting planning and the transfer of funds should be managed at the national rather than the regional level in order to promote the concepts of national leadership just outlined. The Society, in addition to its interest in the conservation and recovery of our rapidly disappearing prehistoric heritage, is also concerned that property trained specialists, using proper research techniques and interpretive methods, carry out the salvage and study that H.R. 6257 will make possible. This can be accomplished by continuing the successful cooperative programs that the National Park Service has developed with state and regional organizations and institutions. Experience has shown that this approach to salvage archaeology has resulted in major economies because of the contributions made by the cooperating institutions. Moreover, the fragmentary nature of archaeological evidence and the painstaking techniques needed for interpretation of these remnants of the past make it necessary for the specialist to immerse himself in the archaeological detail of a region. Continued cooperation between federal agencies and state and local institutions would continue to produce maximum results for the investment, would help to develop a higher level of capacity for quality archaeological work in all regions of the nation, would contribute significantly to the training of competent and knowledgeable archaelogists, and would substantially assist the state and local groups to do a better job of satisfying the tremendous curiosity that our citizens have concerning their prehistoric heritage and the past in general. The continued cooperation of federal and local agencies is not only in accord with present national policy but is also in the grand tradition of federal-state relationships that is a hallmark of the American system of democracy. Finally, I should like to note that the passage of H.R. 6257 and the continued participation of the National Park Service as a review and coordinating agency is most appropriate in this 1972 Centennial Year of the Park Service. It would be particularly symbolic for the Congress to display the enlibhtened leadership of the American people with respect to the conservation and prudent management of their archaeological and historic resources in the same year that the nation is celebrating the far-seeing leadership that it produced one hundred years ago in establishing the national park idea that has since been adopted by so many of the nations of the world. Mr. TAYLOR. Dr. Charles R. McGimsey III. Is Dr. McGimsey here? Dr. MCGIMSEY. Mr. Chairman, I realize I am scheduled next. However, one of the other gentlemen has to catch a plane. Would it be possible for him to Mr. TAYLOR. Dr. Alan Woolworth? Dr. McGIMSEY. Correct. Mr. TAYLOR. Yes. We will call him next. STATEMENT OF DR. ALAN WOOLWORTH, CHIEF OF ARCHEOLOGY, MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY Dr. WOOLWORTH. Mr. Chairman, committee members, regrettably, the State archeologist, Dr. Elden Johnson, could not be present at this hearing. Therefore, I am serving as his representative. In addition, it is my privilege to represent amateur and professional archeologists as well as a large number of concerned citizens who believe it essential to preserve significant portions of our archeological and historical heritage for the benefit of present and future generations. The destruction of archeological and historical values has reached critical proportions in Minnesota-much of the damage has been done through reservoirs, channel improvements, highway construction, and other programs which are at least partially funded through congressional appropriations. House Resolution 6257 and identical bills are vital to the salvage of archeological and historical values. In my opinion, these bills should be passed in their present form. With the chairman's permission, I would like to add a few comments on testimony which was made yesterday by a gentleman from the Department of Agriculture and also to make a few comments about House Resolution 10093, the Bergland bill. Mr. TAYLOR. Go ahead. Dr. WOOLWORTH. Thank you. In Minnesota we have had an active highway archeology program since 1968. Never during these years, and it has been under my direct control, have we found it necessary to halt construction but rather we have worked closely with the highway engineers and the contractors. It is in our best interest and the interest of the taxpayers who support us and the scientific community in general to work in close sympathetic cooperation with everyone to avoid problems. Therefore, we always find it possible to work around the construction or, rather, to have them revert their activities a little ways away while we are doing something. In a few days or a week or two at the mnost, we are completed and then they can go at it again. Speaking in terms of the applicability of this bill to small sites, I would like merely to point out as some of my colleagues have already done that many archeological sites of immense significance are small. To name a few, we have rock shelters and caves which are often along river valleys. Highways invariably run along side these and often highway construction will destroy or significantly damage them. Additionally, we have small what we call lithic campsites. These are of the prepottery era, dating back usually several thousand years. These sites are often small, encompassing less than an acre of land, perhaps a space the size of this room. Yet, highly significant information lies within their confines. In Minnesota, in recent years, we have been alarmed by the rapid development of lakeshores for resorts and summer homes, of highways being built along lakes to provide access to them for recreation purposes. This invariably has resulted in the demolition of some sites such as fur-trade post, Indian villages, by bulldozing the land flat, demolishing the trees and vegetation coverage, and so forth. Going on to another matter, that of the responsible agency to administer this program, in my opinion, and I have worked with the National Park Service for better than 20 years in contract relationship, they would well be able to handle this. Normally they contract out projects with institutions, with local personnel, expertise such as musems, historical societies, colleges, and the like. Going further now to the Bergland bill, Minnesota has a reasonably large Indian population and for some reason a number of them are quite active. None of us deny this prerogative. We are sympathetic toward them in general terms. Although it is true that there has been a lack of communication between native peoples and archeologists in my State, this situation is changing rapidly. By training and orientation, archeologists are anthropologists. Anthropologists are students of man, fellow human beings in the community of man. Most of us have spent significant portions of our lifetimes living with American Indian tribes, studying them, and to a considerable degree being one with them. I would say that in general archeologists are probably one of the very major groups in this country who are significantly and sincerely interested in the well-being of the American Indian. Further, we have done much to preserve and to interpret Indian culture and to conserve the heritage of the American Indian. We believe that that is truly a record in which the native Americans can take deep pride and we share this feeling and are very interested in cooperating with them. Last, I am firmly convinced that the Indians and the archeologists and anthropologists can agree among themselves. They can resolve their problems without legislation. Indeed, if legislation is needed on this subject, in my opinion, it should be separate legislation, not an amendment to the current bill. Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you, Mr. Woolworth. Any questions of this witness? Thank you very much. Now, Mr. Charles R. McGimsey. STATEMENT OF DR. CHARLES R. McGIMSEY III, MEMBER, NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR RECOVERY OF ARCHEOLOGY REMAINS Dr. MCGIMSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In addition to representing the State of Arkansas, including its nearly 1.000 member Arkansas Archeological Society and the National Committee on the Recovery of Archeological Remains, I also am speaking as chairman of the Regional Association of Archeologists composed of all archeologists working in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Mr. TAYLOR. Doctor, we will place a copy of your entire statement in the record and you can comment on it as you see fit. Dr. McGIMSEY. All right. If I could, Mr. Chairman, I would like to address my initial remarks to some of the points for clarification |