Minutes, Cultural and Historical Resources Technical Advisory Team
April, 3 2000

The Cultural and Historical Resources Technical Advisory Team met in regular session in Conference Room A at the Pima County Public Works Center, 201 N. Stone Avenue, Tucson, Arizona on Monday, April .32, 2000 at 10:30 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. Mary Farrell, Coronado National Forest
Mr. Jerry Kyle, Arizona Historical Society
Mr. Peter Steere, Tohono O'odham Nation Cultural Preservation Office
Ms. Susan Wells, National Parks Service
Ms. Marty McCune, Historic Program Administrator, City of Tucson
Ms. Linda Mayro, Pima County Archaeological and Historic Preservation Office
Mr. David Cushman, Pima County Archaeological and Historic Preservation Office

Absent:
Mr. Max Witkind, Bureau of Land Management
Mr. Joe Joaquin, Tohono O'odham Nation Cultural Preservation Office

There were two members of the public present:
Mr. Henry Wallace, Desert Archaeology, Inc.
Mr. Lucas Premo, Graduate Student, University of Arizona.

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order by Paul Fish at approximately 10:35 a.m.

OLD BUSINESS

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 14th AND March 6th, 2000 MEETINGS

Jerry Kyle motioned that the minutes of the February 14th and March 6th meetings be approved as written. Mary Farrell seconded the motion and the motioned was unanimously approved.

NEW BUSINESS

UPDATES

Ms. Mayro gave an update on the schedule for preparing the draft Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan due in July. She passed out a copy of the Week 16 update prepared by the Assistant to the County Administrator, Maveen Behan. The update showed the order and approximate timing of the upcoming subarea meetings before the Steering Committee and the due date for the preliminary Cultural Resources Element...

Then Ms. Mayro informed the Team about Pima County's proposed Ironwood Preserve, which has the support of the Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt. She said that there is a good likelihood that it will be created. The area contains archaeological sites and she will recommended that its boundary be extended to include Cerro Prieto in Pinal County.

Ms. Mayro discussed the Preserve design and observed that the Team needed to be included in the design review process.

Paul Fish asked how the Ironwood Preserve would effect the Tortolita Fan subarea. Ms. Mayro said that she could not say at this time and noted that development was already occurring in the area. She then mentioned a map that Pima county has prepared to show the location of state lands that may be developed in the near future. A total of 88,000 acres of state land in 16 parcels have special land use permits with 5 year leases. These lands, located on the periphery of the urban area, can be sold for development and are thus threatened. Ms. Mayro noted that this information is being used to measure future threat to cultural resources.

David Cushman then spoke to the Team and gave un update on the San Pedro and Altar Valley subareas presentations that were given before the Steering Committee on Saturday March 25th. He reported that the session went well and that the only complaints that he (and Ms. Mayro) had received were that not enough information about specific sites was included in the report.

Marty McCune voiced concern that there needs to be more advance notice of these meetings in the future. She also felt that the subarea reports would benefit from references or recommended readings.

Beth Grindell recommended illustrating the presentation with site photos or other graphics.

Ms. Mayro then asked Dr. Grindell to update the Team on the AZSITE contract. Dr. Grindell reported that the contract with Pima County was proceeding with data cleanup. She reported no further communication problems between the Arizona State Museum and Arizona State University. The Museum can access the archaeological site attribute data now. Ms. Mayro noted how important resolving the data cleanup and access problems are in anticipation of the NCPTT site probability grant. Dr. Grindell noted that the data are being queried by a number of means, including using ArcView, Systat, and Excel.

4. ASSESSING CULTURAL RESOURCES VALUES

Mr. Cushman raised the issue of accessing the value of cultural resources and pointed out that this is a subject that the Team has grappled with in the past without any real conclusion. He suggested that instead of pursuing this objective at this time, it would be better to use the limited time and resources to identify where in space we know about and can expect to find concentrations o f cultural resources. This way we avoid the whole subject of what is eligible for listing on the National Register and at what scale this designation should occur, and simply focus on general information on site distribution on a gross scale. Later, it may be necessary to be specific about which cultural resources in what location are valuable and for what reason, but for the draft Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan, it is more important to speak of "sensitivity zones" or "hot spots." In the report, we will present the National Register criteria, discuss known resources, and identify area of predicted sensitivity. Then, during the process of preparing the Environmental Impact Statement, new data on cultural resources will be collected, and a more refined statement about resource value can be prepared.

Mr. Kyle recommended that the criteria for evaluation that we have developed to date be included in the report so that it can be referenced later. Mr. Cushman thought this was a good idea.

Ms. McCune suggested that confidence levels be used in predicting the location of sensitive areas.

Dr. Fish wanted to know how the result of this effort will relate to the modeling being conducted by the California Team to prepare conservation alternatives. Ms. Mayro responded by saying that what is required to begin with is gross level data with increasingly refined information later as planning progresses. She acknowledged that the Team will need to make evaluations later, but not for the July report. She noted that the City of Tucson needs to do this same kind of research as well.

Henry Wallace remarked that there are really two levels of value, the common and the rare, and that we need to be able to address both and develop criteria for evaluating these separately.

Ms. Mayro noted that in 1997 she sent out a request for input from experts in the field of archaeology on sites/resources that should be preserved through the County preservation bond. She suggested floating these ideas again and see what kind of reaction people have now.

Mr. Cushman suggested that perhaps these places could become the "constraints," that is, the places that are so important that they are untouchable.

PREDICTING SITE SENSITIVITY ZONES

In light of the preceding discussions, Mr. Cushman proposed that the Team identify a small group of archaeological experts to provide their best educated guesses as to where areas of high archaeological sensitivity area located in each subarea. This exercise would be purely subjective and based solely on the personal knowledge and experience of people who have worked in these areas. The result would give Pima County a means of making predictive statements now, before and in anticipation of the more rigorous and objective site probability modeling that hopefully will be funded through the NCPTT. The county could print out GIS maps of each subarea containing topographic lines, drainages, and major roads, etc. Then, we give the maps to the experts and asked them to literally draw circles in space with a pencil indicating where in their expert opinion the sensitive areas are located.

Mr. Wallace thought the idea was good. He remarked that it could at least stand as a record of how wrong we are in our predictions.

Sue Wells suggested adding other information if possible, such as vegetation, slope and known site locations.

Ms. McCune recommended making the process public, if there is time.

Mr. Wallace said that in his opinion, people would want to see the maps and would probably ask for more detail before they could do what was needed.

Ms. Mayro suggested that for the next meeting, copies of all the subarea maps be prepared in large format.

Mr. Wallace expressed concerns about releasing site location information but was assured by Ms. Mayro that specific site location information will not be released.

Mr. Wallace suggested a meeting of all the experts first to explain the purpose of the exercise the criteria to be used and how the information will be included in the report. He envisions short meetings for each subarea, no more than 2 hours each, and suggested making it a collective exercise with 2 to 4 people maximum for each subarea. That way the work will benefit from the interaction among experts.

Mr. Cushman asked for input from the Team members on who should be a part of the list of experts.

6. NEXT MEETING

Next meeting will be on Monday, May 1, at 10:30 a.m. at the Pima County Public Works Center Conference Room A.

7. ADJOURNMENT

As there was no further business to come before the Cultural and Historic Resources Technical Advisory Team, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m.

(Notes taken by David Cushman, Pima County Cultural Resources Office)