The Cultural and Historical Resources Technical Advisory Team met in regular session in Conference Room D at the Tucson-Pima County Public Works Center, 201 N. Stone Avenue, Tucson, Arizona on Monday, August 30, 1999 at 10:15 a.m. Those present and absent were listed as follows:

Present:

Dr. Paul Fish, Arizona State Museum (Chair)
Dr. Beth Grindell, Arizona State Museum
Ms. Linda Mayro, Pima County Archaeological and Historic Preservation Office
Mr. David Cushman, Pima County Archaeological and Historic Preservation Office
Mr. Jerry Kyle, Arizona Historical Society
Ms. Susan Wells, National Parks Service
Ms. Mary Farrell, Coronado National Forest
Mr. Peter Steere, Tohono O'odham Nation Cultural Preservation Office
Mr. Joe Joaquin, Tohono O'odham Nation Cultural Preservation Office

Absent:

Mr. Max Witkind, Bureau of Land Management

The following guests also attended this meeting:

Mr. John Regan, Pima County Geographical Information System
Mr. Tony Burrell, Tohono O'odham Cultural Preservation Commission
Mr. Alex Ramon, Tohono O'odham Cultural Preservation Commission
Mr. Daniel Preston, Tohono O'odham Tribal Member
Mr. Hartman Lomawaima, Associate Director of Arizona State Museum
Mr. Rick Karl, Arizona State Museum
Mr. Simon Donovan, Artist/Community Resource Center

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order by Paul Fish at approximately 10:15 a.m.

OLD BUSINESS

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The June 28, 1999 meeting minutes were unanimously approved by a 8-0 vote.

APPROVAL OF DRAFT MISSION STATEMENT

The Cultural and Historical Resources Technical Advisory Team Mission Statement was unanimously approve by a 8-0 vote.

NEW BUSINESS

4. PIMA COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM

John Regan provided a pamphlet of information to the attendees regarding the purpose and activities of Pima County Geographic Information System, which is a section within the Technical Services Division of the Pima County Department of Transportation and Flood Control District. There are 15 employees and the database has 178 data layers. The purpose for this division is to provide timely and accurate geographically-referenced information to decision-makers in the form of maps and/or reports. Major functions include data capture, data storage and manipulation (file management and editing), data analysis (database query, spatial analysis, modeling) and data display (maps and reports).

The GIS section of the Department uses the Internet to provide the general public with access to the database. Tools such as Map Guide allow users to display spatial data and perform simple analysis, while other browser tools provide views of metadata (information about the database). The locations of archaeological sites are not available to the public.

Mr. Regan explained that the data model includes maps (graphic data), database (tabular data) and graphic data (tabular data integration) within its Geographic Information System. Basic features within the data model allows the Section to map points, lines and polygons, and keep data in independent layers. Information on cultural and historical resources will be included in the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (SDCP) GIS database as one of six planning elements. He speculated that examining land use is probably the most powerful application of this information.

Mr. Regan went on to explain that the University of California-Davis will develop a model to identify areas that should and should not be conserved using information that is being gathered by the Pima County GIS Section. He pointed out that cultural resources (among others) will require an assessment of value using criteria to be included in the model.

David Cushman asked if Pima County would be developing the criteria for assessing value and Mr. Regan responded affirmatively.

Linda Mayro briefly explained the data layers that are being built and talked about the use of this information for planning purposes. She noted that location information can be suppressed.

Peter Steere asked who would define these values and Mr. Cushman responded that this would be up to Pima County, that is, the technical advisory team. The point, he explained, is to see where cultural resources congregate in space in relation to natural resources. He suggested that preserving cultural and historic resources has the greatest chance where these resources overlap with natural resources that are also subject to the SDCP planning effort. He added that the technical advisory team will have to argue for the preservation of those resources that do not congregate in space and lack the correlation with natural resources.

Mr. Steere asked if Pima County can deny access to information and Ms. Mayro stated that access to certain kinds of information could be denied under state law.

Mr. Regan reported that the GIS system will expand with time as more data layers are added. Pima County will use the data for our own purposes in the future. He added that only University of California-Davis, who was selected for their expertise, is building the model that will be used for the SDCP.

Dr. Fish inquired whether other agencies could access this information. Mr. Regan stated access was possible with some source restrictions.

Ms. Mayro handed out a land status map of eastern Pima County. She drew attention to the state lands, especially to the south and east, and discussed how ranches lease this land for their operations. She explained that the State Land Department is mandated to sell state lands under law if it is offered fair market price and cited this as a potential threat to both ranching and open space.

5. AZ SITE UPDATE

Beth Grindell provided a brief history of the site files at the Arizona State Museum. She noted that until recently all of the information that ASM had on file was kept on paper records. Over the years, other institutions, such as Northern Arizona Univeristy, the Bureau of Land Management, the United States Forest Service (USDS), the National Park Service, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), also kept their own records. By the early 1990's, 24 separate sources of data on historic and archaeological sites existed in Arizona.

In 1995, Arizona State Museum, Museum of Northern Arizona, Arizona State University, and SHPO founded the AZSITE Consortium for the purposes of centralizing the state's information on archaeological and historic sites and to convert the paper records into an electronic data base that could be accessed by researchers, planners, and others with proper authorization.

She explained that the AZSITE database contains information on archaeological and historic sites, as well as site survey data and that this information is kept in two separate coverages, one for sites and the other for surveys.

Dr. Grindell went on to say that the AZSITE planning took several years with lots of consultation among multiple parties. Federal funds and state heritage funds have been used to fund this program. The Data are held in ArcView, which is compatible with the County's GIS ArcInfo program, allowing communication between the two.

The AZSITE Project has been ongoing for approximately 3 to 4 years. Pima County approached ASM last spring to update its records for eastern Pima County and entered into a contract for this work in June. ASM is using student labor for data entry and the project should be done in a couple of months.

Dr. Grindell then distributed a handout of the AZSITE data architectural flow chart. She discussed various attributes that are included such site history. She also pointed out that information on destroyed sites is also maintained in database.

A second handout was distributed. This illustrated the distribution of sites and surveys conducted before and since the start of the AZSITE contract on June 11, 1999. Since June, ASM has added 600 more sites and 150 surveys to the database.

Ms. Mayro inquired about National Register District boundaries and Rick Karl, from ASM, responded that this information is maintained as separate data layer. Historic property information at the SHPO is accessible and will be available soon through the AZSITE system. Ms. Grindell pointed out the development and systems work for AZSITE is being done at Arizona State University.

Ms. Mayro asked who else is contributing information. What about the Buenos Aires Wildlife Refuge? Where are the loop holes in data?

Mr. Steere pointed out that lots of small surveys are done and that the result of most of these are unknown. Ms. Mayro found this true in rural areas in particular.

Mr. Steere stated that Arizona Department of Transportation probably had the most information on rural areas.

Mary Farrell stated that information on Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs) will not be included in the data that the USFS is providing ASM to update AZSITE.

Dr. Grindell responded by saying that AZSITE is not designed to maintain information on TCPs. She suggested that perhaps this could be addressed as a separate data layer in the future

DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK FOR TECHNICAL STUDIES

Mr. Cushman handed out a draft scope of work for three studies that have been identified as being important to the preservation planning needed for the SDCP. These are an analysis and synthesis of the AZSITE archaeological and historical data, a Traditional Cultural Properties inventory, and a study of Rural Historic Landscapes. He asked the team members to respond with any comments by September 20. He needs input from the committee and requested they review and provide comments so that the scope of work could be developed into a Request for Proposals.

He then discussed each one explaining briefly what would be the subject of study and the tasks and deliverables for each. The analysis of archaeological and historical information in the AZSITE database is needed to characterize what we know of these cultural resources and their distribution across the landscape. He added that we need to know something about the condition of the resource, that is, what reamins and what has been lost over time along with an assesment of the present threat to the reamining portions of the archaeological record. Lastly, he pointed out the need to develop a site sensitivity model to help predict where sites will be located so that this can be used for preservation planning.

The TCP study is needed to locate, identify, and characterize places with traditional cultural value to Native America, Hispanic and other traditional communities with historical interests in eastern Pima County. He propoised that the study should be limited to collecting information on previously known and reported TCPs through archival research to be supplemented with follow up interviews with knowledgeable people. The purpose of the this study is to provide an opportunity to traditional communties to identify in space those places of concern to them so that this information can be added to the county's planning efforts. Mr. Cushman noted tha the information need only be general in nature, not specific, and that permission to use this information for planning purposes needs to be obtained.

Mr. Cushman then discussed the third proposed study on rural historic landscapes. He proposed taking a landscape approval to examining historic landuse patterning associaed with ranching, mining, forestry, historic settlements and transporation cooridors. This would ential preparing a historic overview for each of the eight subareas in eastern Pima County, and through archival research, identify cultural resources that relate to these landscape themes. Additional study would be required to assess the rarity of resource type, inegrity or condiction, and threat.

There was no discussion.

 

NEXT MEETING

Mr. Cushman reiterated his request for input from the technical team on the scope of work. Then, he opended discussion on topics for the next meeting. It was agreed that the next meeting would by held on Monday, September 27 from 10:00 a.m. to 12 noon, at the City-County Public Works Center, 201 N. Stone Avenue, Conference Room D.

Topics to be discussed would include the scope of work for the techncial studies, the October 16th SDCP education session, identifying cultural resources to be included in the SDCP, and assigning value to the resources.

Dr. Fish had a question at the end and wanted to know by when the Team would need to assess cultural resources value. Mr. Regan said that this would be needed by next spring.

ADJOURNMENT

As there was no further business to come before the Cultural and Historic Resources Technical Advisory Team, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 a.m.