The Vermont Archaeological Society recently sent out a message to its members regarding the Douglas Administration's plans to weaken archaeological protections in ACT 250. We thought friends of the Mount might be interested, so we asked and received permission from VAS President Brigitte Helzer to reprint the message here:
Dear VAS members:
There has probably been debate about how to manage and pay for historic preservation in general, and archaeology in particular, under Act 250 since the day it was passed. It appears that the most recent version of this debate has made its way down the administrative path farther than previous ones, and we are currently faced with an opportunity to comment on some "proposed rules changes".
Based on the language proposed for the rule change, it appears that there is a desire to dramatically limit field investigations under ACT 250 to only those areas that contain sites already listed on the State Register.
This may well mean that archaeologically sensitive areas, whether sensitive for precontact Native American sites, or early historic sites, will not be studied unless there is already a known site nearby. This would effectively "freeze" our knowledge of the past at what is already known.
In addition, the funding mechanism for field investigations is slated for change. Currently the burden falls on the developer or project proponent. Archaeologists and developers have long supported a fee structure that would underwrite these archaeological costs (similar to the system provided for natural resources). This would spread the burden across the whole applicant pool, and lend greater predictability to permit process costs for all applicants.
The present proposal has the District Commissions funding field studies, but does not say where the funding would come from (perhaps from an application fee, but this is not specified). Without explaining where the money would come from or how it would be administered, it appears to run the risk of setting up a competition between resource areas for the Commission's (no doubt limited) funds. They might, in other words, have to split existing funds between all the affected resource areas. Without any knowledge of how this would work (i.e., allocation criteria) or the composition of the Commission (do they know anything about archaeological sites?) it seems risky to support such a proposition.
The fact that the press release features the phrase "in these challenging economic times..." should be a red flag suggesting that the administration could be using the present, temporary economic crisis to roll back protection and preservation of archaeological resources.
It would be nice to discover that these proposed rules changes are, in fact, designed as a step forward for historic preservation in Vermont. The best way to find out and help assure that it is so is to participate in one of the public meetings, or submit your comments and questions about these proposed changes by mail or email.
Dates and locations of the public hearings are listed in the sidebar at www.historicvermont.org