|
Examples of the huts Union soldiers used in Stafford County are on display at the White Oak Museum. Many archeological firms fail to correctly identify Civil War sites. |
IAM A LIFELONG resident of Stafford County. My ancestors have been here since the mid-1600s, since this great country of ours was still under British rule. I am also descended from Native Americans in this area, and the roots from those genes go back even further.
These roots have caused me to have a deep reverence for my county's history. There is a matter that's brewing that alarms me and threatens to both alter and diminish Stafford County's history: Cultural resource archaeological firms have been misinterpreting the historic sites of Stafford County. Already this has cost developers, home buyers, and taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. To give just two examples, surveys on the Dixon Smith Middle School site and the Ewalt Farm property, where the sixth Stafford high school will be built, have already cost $413,500.
Some people in our county are seriously considering making Phase I archaeological ordinances mandatory. An ordinance to this effect was presented to the Stafford Board of Supervisors on July 18, 2006. At that time, some residents were very hopeful that our board would have the wisdom to vote it down; as it turned out, they only deferred the decision. Now the ordinance, which could become very damaging to the average resident, is being brought up once again by the Historic Commission.
Proponents argue that it is going to be applied only to developers and to developments of a certain size. Further, they argue that only with a mandatory ordinance can they get developers to agree to doing Phase I surveys.
This has not proven to be correct; surveys are already being completed without mandatory regulation in place.
Mandatory Phase I study requirements, and any associated mandatory Phase II and Phase III study requirements that are not negotiated with the property owner, are an infringement on private property rights and will drive up housing costs. It is my strong belief that those cultural resource (archaeological) firms supporting this ordinance are doing so for monetary gain more so than wanting the county's historical record to be preserved.
I have seen evidence of this from my own years of investigation and also have heard from those who have worked closely to this situation in various ways.
When I have shown ex-archaeologists (and others who have worked with some archaeological firms) the studies and pointed out the serious mistakes made, and then asked how such inaccuracies are possible, each has answered with the almost exact remark, "It isn't as much about finding anything of historical significance, it's more about the money."
Alarmingly, some of Stafford County's decision-makers have been made aware of inaccurate surveys, and yet still may support this ordinance.
It is also my belief that the intention of this ordinance is, in time, to make archaeological surveys mandatory for all landowners of Stafford. By doing so, this would guarantee even more work for these cultural resource firms.
I've spent 47 years in the fields, farmlands, and woodlands of Stafford County studying maps, researching, excavating, and recording each of these historic sites--long before there were any certified archaeologists or archaeology studies in Stafford County. I have mapped out 7,820 Civil War hut sites, latrines, and trash pits in careful detail. I also have acquired additional information from other keen observers and researchers of historical documentation.
I began investigating these archaeological surveys five years ago, when a concerned citizen came to see me with a survey he had obtained from Stafford County, conducted by a professional cultural resources archaeological firm on a property that adjoined his property. I was greatly surprised by the lack of accurate information concerning the recordings and findings of the site--land that I had already observed and recorded 30-plus years ago (the physical features have not changed).
I can give many examples of what has come to light in my research on this matter, but I have limited space. Although the examples I will give involve one particular firm, it is not the only firm that has given Stafford County inaccurate reports.
This first survey I studied concluded that one project area contained two groupings of Civil War hut depressions--30 in one grouping and 11 in the other, for a total of 41 hut depressions in all. I know this site very well, as I visited it many times with my father, starting nearly 40 years ago. Using a metal detector, we searched these two large hut site areas. I began mapping at that time.
The cultural resource firm's report states that the site with the 11 depressions was so "damaged by looters" that they (the archaeologists) were "prevented from observing organization with any accuracy." I would be willing to testify that this was a false conclusion. The fact is that this camp is well-laid out in near military-regulation style, and it was not damaged beyond recognition, as the report stated.
In 2004, with permission from the developer and owner, a friend, and I went onto the property mentioned, and the 150-plus depressions that I had already mapped out years ago, composed of a hut and latrine and sink, and all the other Civil War-related depressions were completely intact--just as I had observed and mapped nearly 40 years ago. It's fair to say that the number 150 is a far cry from the 11 that was reported.
In this same area, there is another cluster of Civil War depressions that were not recorded in the firm's survey. In the entire property studied, I have mapped more than 200 Civil War-related features. The firm doesn't even have a quarter of this number.
The following is this firm's objective as written in the report: "The Phase I archaeological survey was designed to locate and identify all archaeological resources and landscape features within the project area, as well as to document any standing structures over 50 years of age within or visible from the project area archaeological sites and architectural resources present within the project area, and to obtain sufficient information to make recommendations about the further research potential of each resource based on its potential eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places." Obviously, this firm missed its main objective.
The firm's Figure 10 base map of the archaeological study shows only four metal detector hits; however, I know that this site contains a large number of nails, barrel hoop pieces, and other iron artifacts (which are most often not collected by relic hunters). It is absolutely impossible to do a metal detector survey in a regimental camp of this size and get only four metal detector hits.
These surveys become a vital research document for present and future researchers, who rely heavily on their accuracy. As historical recorders, they should be required to give as accurate a report as possible.
How many unaware researchers have assumed those archaeological reports were factual? One former Stafford County Historic Preservation Planner, believing that this report and its 41 hut depressions was accurate, wrote to the National Park Service in 2005 and gave them the above information.
The NPS replied: "Since only 41 hut depressions were identified, it is quite possible that the project area just clipped the edge of what was obviously a larger encampment or some of the depressions have been lost to agricultural activity or other intrusive land uses. If that is the case, portions of the larger camp may survive as sub-surface features or may in fact be outside the proposed development."
Obviously, because this information came from a certified, licensed firm, it was believed to be infallible, thus misleading the county planner and the National Park Service. What's more, the portion of the report (with the number of depressions listed as only 41) was presented to the Planning Commission in 2009.
As you can see, this report mislead readers and researchers. Consider what will happen in 100 years--we who have firsthand knowledge of Stafford County will have passed away, and our descendents will study these documents and will assume that because they were completed by certified, licensed archaeologists, they must be correct. This matter isn't just about us today; this is about future generations. No historian, archaeologist, or average resident should accept such a poor quality of interpretation.
As I have only scratched the surface of the inaccurate work that's been done, I must warn Stafford County officials and residents before they endorse the archaeological surveys. We must stop supporting cultural resource firms that do inaccurate work on Stafford County land and residents' land. These firms are wasting the taxpayers' precious dollars.
D. P. Newton is founder and owner of the White Oak Museum in Stafford County.
