The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and Section 106
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended, was enacted by Congress out of public concern that important historic properties (e.g., sites, objects, buildings, districts, or structures) in the United States were in danger of disappearing as a result of Federal projects (e.g., construction, demolition, permitting, rehabilitation and repair, etc.). Although earlier legislation already existed that dealt with certain types of historic resources and/or properties (e.g., Antiquities Act of 1906; Historic Sites Act of 1935 [King et al. 1977]), many historic or potentially historic resources disappeared from the landscape throughout the 1950s and 1960s as a result of Federal highway projects, urban renewal projects, and dam construction. The NHPA was the first legislation that comprehensively dealt with the necessity for establishing a means to ensure that all historic or potentially historic resources were taken into consideration during any Federal project (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1991).
The lynchpin of the NHPA is Section 106, which requires each Federal agency to take into account the effects of its actions on historic properties; and also affords the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an independent Federal Agency created by the NHPA an opportunity to comment on any of the agencys undertakings that could affect historic properties (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1991). An integral part of this process is determining what resources are considered historically significant.
What makes something historically significant?
Four main criteria are employed to determine whether or not a site, object, building, district, or structure is considered important in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and/or culture. Briefly summarized, these criteria are:
lCriterion A: Association with events, activities, or patterns in history.
Criterion B: Association with an important person or persons in history.
Criterion C: Distinctive design or physical characteristic.
Criterion D: Potential to yield important information in either prehistory or history.
If a resource is determined to be significant or potentially significant based on the application of one or more of the above criteria, it may then be considered for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places , the Federal governments official listing of Americas historic resources.
Where does the Reed Farmstead site fit in?
lFollowing Phase II archaeological testing at the Reed Farmstead site, it was determined that the site was eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D due to the information potential it may yield concerning rural social and economic patterns within nineteenth century western Virginia/West Virginia.
The Reed Farmstead site exhibits a high degree of archaeological integrity, and has a high potential for containing important information about rural antebellum through early postbellum farmsteads west of the Blue Ridge. In contrast to extensive archaeological studies of contemporaneous farmstead sites in the Virginia Tidewater and Piedmont regions, little research has been directed toward the reconstruction of rural lifeways in this region.
What happens once an archaeological site is considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places?
Lets use the Reed Farmstead site as our example. Since the site was discovered and determined to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places during a Federally funded project, the next step is to take into consideration the effects of the project on the site. Since the Reed Farmstead site is situated completely within the proposed highway right-of-way, it was determined that the effects of the project would be direct and adverse. A means for avoiding or reducing these impacts is sought.
For cultural resources in general, the preferred mitigation option typically is avoidance. However, in some instances avoidance of a resource is neither wise nor feasible. In those cases, such as at the Reed Farmstead site, Phase III archaeological data recovery excavations are conducted at the site to gather the information that makes the site important. Consequently, while the site may be damaged or destroyed by the Federal project, the archaeological information that made the site important is preserved, and made available to the public as well as the professional community.