Difference between revisions of "CULTURAL"

From Glen Canyon Dam AMP
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(25 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 54: Line 54:
 
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Updates</h2>
 
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Updates</h2>
  
[[File:AeolianResults2017.jpg|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf]
+
[[File:2021 DisturbanceType.JPG|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf] <br>
  
[[File:AeolianUpdate2017.jpg|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf]
+
[[File:2021 Summary.JPG|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf] <br>
  
[[File:AeolianOptions.jpg|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf]
+
[[File:AeolianOptions.jpg|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf] <br>
  
[[File:AeolianTypes.jpg|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf]
+
[[File:AeolianTypes.jpg|center|500px]] [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf] <br>
  
 
|}
 
|}
Line 74: Line 74:
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
|style="color:#000;"|
  
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=Tribal_Resources Tribal Resources Page]
+
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=Portal:GCDAMP_Knowlege_Assessments GCMRC Annual Reports page]
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=GCDAMP_CRAHG_Page Cultural Resources (CRAHG) AdHoc Group]
+
*[https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/management/upload/CRMPIF_s.pdf 2006 Colorado River Management Plan]
 +
*[https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/historyculture/preservation.htm Grand Canyon National Park Archeological Resources page]
 +
*[https://www.nps.gov/features/grca/001/archeology/index.html Grand Canyon River Archeology Virtual Tour]
 
*[http://www.gcmrc.gov/research_areas/cultural_resources/cultural_resources_default.aspx USGS-GCMRC Cultural Resources Link]
 
*[http://www.gcmrc.gov/research_areas/cultural_resources/cultural_resources_default.aspx USGS-GCMRC Cultural Resources Link]
 +
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=GCDAMP_CRAHG_Page Cultural Resources (CRAHG) AdHoc Group]
 +
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=Tribal_Resources Tribal Resources Page]
 
*[[Media:2017 LTEMP Final PA.pdf| 2017 LTEMP Programmatic Agreement]]
 
*[[Media:2017 LTEMP Final PA.pdf| 2017 LTEMP Programmatic Agreement]]
*Historic Properties Plan
+
*[[Media:2018 LTEMP HPP.pdf| 2018 LTEMP Historic Preservation Plan ]]
 
*[[Media:Draft GCMRC Monitoring Plan w Appendix.docx| Draft plan for monitoring effects of geomorphic processes at archaeological sites in Grand & Glen Canyon. 10/7/15]]
 
*[[Media:Draft GCMRC Monitoring Plan w Appendix.docx| Draft plan for monitoring effects of geomorphic processes at archaeological sites in Grand & Glen Canyon. 10/7/15]]
 +
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=GCDAMP-_Over-Flights Over Flights Page]
  
 
|-
 
|-
Line 89: Line 94:
  
 
|-
 
|-
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Questions </h2>
+
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Stakeholder Questions </h2>
 
|-
 
|-
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 +
 +
*Does aeolian sand transport research support the use of anthropogenic sand bar building as a means to provide a source of aeolian sands to preserve and protect archaeological sites or would current stabilization measures carried out by the NPS be more likely to be successful, predictable, and immediate at protecting archaeological sites?
  
 
[[Media:Collins 2016 GCArchSitesAeolian.pdf| '''Collin et al. 2016:''' ]]
 
[[Media:Collins 2016 GCArchSitesAeolian.pdf| '''Collin et al. 2016:''' ]]
 
*Aeolian deposition was found at 4 of 13 sites (30%) where partial infilling occurred preventing further erosion.  
 
*Aeolian deposition was found at 4 of 13 sites (30%) where partial infilling occurred preventing further erosion.  
 
*“Despite this promise for archaeological site preservation, our observations show that gully annealing can only occur under a specific set of conditions related to fluvial sand availability and wind transport direction.”  
 
*“Despite this promise for archaeological site preservation, our observations show that gully annealing can only occur under a specific set of conditions related to fluvial sand availability and wind transport direction.”  
 
*Does Aeolian sand transport research support the use of anthropogenic sand bar building as a means to provide a source of aeolian sands to preserve and protect archaeological sites?
 
*Or would current stabilization measures carried out by the NPS be more likely to be successful, predictable, and immediate at protecting archaeological sites?
 
  
 
|-
 
|-
Line 104: Line 108:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 +
 +
'''2024'''
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2024-02-29-amwg-meeting/20240229-EffectsDamOperationsArchaeologicalSites-508-UCRO.pdf Effects of dam operations and vegetation management on the preservation and geomorphic condition of archaeological sites ]
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2024-01-25-twg-meeting/20240125-AnnualReportingMeeting-EffectsDamOperationsVegetationManagementPreservationGeomorphicConditionArchaeologicalSites-508-UCRO.pdf Effects of dam operations and vegetation management on the preservation and geomorphic condition of archaeological sites]
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2024-01-25-twg-meeting/20240125-AnnualReportingMeeting-MonitoringPotentialThreatsGrandCanyonRockArt-508-UCRO.pdf Monitoring for Potential Threats to Grand Canyon Rock Art ]
 +
*[[Media:Tango ARM2024 Poster IPDS.pdf| River management influences on archaeological site preservation: Results of more than a decade of monitoring geomorphic change along the Colorado River]]
 +
 +
'''2023''''
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2023-04-13-twg-meeting/20230413-Section106NationalHistoricPreservationAct-508-UCRO.pdf Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act]
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2023-01-26-twg-meeting/20230126-AnnualReportingMeeting-ArchaeologicalSitesErodingGrandCanyonOwingSixDecadesGle%20CanyonDamOperations-508-UCRO.pdf Archaeological Sites are Eroding in Grand Canyon Owing to Six Decades of Glen Canyon Dam Operations: Floods, Low Flows and Vegetation Management Can Help]
 +
 +
'''2022'''
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2022-08-18-amwg-meeting/20220818-Nelson-LTEMP-PA2022Summary_508.pdf Glen Canyon’s LTEMP Annual Cultural PA Meeting 2022]
 +
*[https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2022/1097/ofr20221097.pdf Caster et al., 2022, Terrestrial lidar monitoring of the effects of Glen Canyon Dam operations on the geomorphic condition of archaeological sites in Grand Canyon National Park, 2010–2020]
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2022-02-10-amwg-meeting/20220210-NPS-USGSArchaeologicalSiteMonitoringResearch-508-UCRO.pdf NPS and USGS Archaeological Site Monitoring and Research ]
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf 2021 LTEMP Archaeological Site Section 106 Monitoring ]
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-CulturalBenefitsActionOpportunityFramework-508-UCRO.pdf Cultural Benefits Action Opportunity Framework ]
 +
 +
'''2020'''
 +
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2020-02-12-amwg-meeting/20200212-GCMRCScienceUpdatesPart3-Presentation-508-UCRO.pdf GCMRC 2019 Annual Reporting Meeting Overview – Part 3 ]
  
 
'''2018'''
 
'''2018'''
Line 150: Line 174:
 
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2009-03-16-twg-meeting/Attach_12f.pdf Geoarchaeological investigations and an archaelogical treatment plan for 151 sites in Grand Canyon, Arizona]
 
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2009-03-16-twg-meeting/Attach_12f.pdf Geoarchaeological investigations and an archaelogical treatment plan for 151 sites in Grand Canyon, Arizona]
 
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2009-03-16-twg-meeting/Attach_13.pdf Analysis of Virtual Shorelines in Relation to Archaeological Sites in the Colorado river Ecosystem PPT]
 
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2009-03-16-twg-meeting/Attach_13.pdf Analysis of Virtual Shorelines in Relation to Archaeological Sites in the Colorado river Ecosystem PPT]
 
|-
 
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Tribal Monitoring Reports</h2>
 
|-
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
 
'''2017'''
 
*[[Media:2017 SPC Annual Report-Final.docx| Southern Paiute Consortium monitoring report]]
 
 
'''2016'''
 
* [[Media:ZuniColoradoRiverMonitoringTrip 2016 FinalReport 24March2017.pdf | Zuni River Monitoring Trip Report - Skyship Films ]]
 
* [[Media:2016 SPC report CLEAN COPY.docx| Southern Paiute Consortium monitoring report]]
 
* [[Media:Final River Trip Report 021217 (1).pdf| Hualapai monitoring report]]
 
* [[Media:CPO - 2016 Annual Monitoring Report.pdf| Hopi monitoring report]]
 
 
'''2015'''
 
* [[Media:2015 SPC Annual Report Final (1).pdf |Southern Paiute Consortium monitoring report]]
 
* [[Media:Final 2015 River Trip Report 011316.pdf | Hualapai monitoring report]]
 
* [[Media:2015 Monitoring Report (1).pdf | Hopi monitoring report]]
 
* [[Media:Zuni2015ColoradoRiverMonitoringReport (2).pdf | Zuni River Monitoring Trip Report]]
 
 
'''2014'''
 
* [[Media:2014 Navajo Nation River Monitoring Trip Report.pdf |Navajo Nation River Monitoring Trip Report]]
 
* [[Media:2014 Hopi.pdf| Hopi Long-Term Monitoring Program for the Grand Canyon]]
 
* [[Media:2014 ZUNI ASSOCIATIVE VALUES IN GRAND CANYON PROJECT.pdf|Zuni Associative Values in Grand Canyon]]
 
* [[Media:Zuni FY2014 GCDAMP Participation Annual Report (3) (1).pdf |Zuni GCDAMP Participation Annual Report]]
 
 
'''2012'''
 
* [[Media:2012 SPC Annual Report final rev.docx| Paiute Annual Monitoring Report]]
 
* [[Media:2012 Monitoring Report.pdf  | Hopi Annual Monitoring Report]]
 
* [[Media:2012 Hualapai doc.pdf  | Hualapai Monitoring Report]]
 
 
'''2011'''
 
* [[Media:2011 Zuni.pdf | Zuni Cultural Resources Monitoring Report]]
 
  
 
|-
 
|-

Latest revision as of 10:32, 23 August 2024


300px‎

300px‎

Cultural and Archaeological Resources

The lower reaches of Glen Canyon and the river corridor through Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, have been used by humans for at least 13,000 years. Today, at least nine contemporary Native American Tribes claim traditional cultural ties to this area. Grand Canyon National Park contains more than 4,000 documented prehistoric and historic sites, and about 420 of these sites are located in proximity to the Colorado River. The lower reaches of Glen Canyon contain an additional 55 sites.

In addition to archaeological sites, cultural resources along the Colorado River corridor include historic structures and other types of historic properties, as well as biological and physical resources that are of traditional cultural importance to Native American peoples such as springs, unique landforms, mineral deposits, native plant concentrations, and various animal species.

LTEMP Resource Goal for Archaeological and Cultural Resources

Maintain the integrity of potentially affected NRHP-eligible or listed historic properties in place, where possible, with preservation methods employed on a site-specific basis.

Desired Future Condition for Cultural Resources

Prehistoric Archaeological Sites and Historic Sites:
To the extent feasible, maintain significance and integrity through preservation in place.
• If preservation in place is not feasible or reasonable, then implementation of appropriate preservation treatments will be implemented to ensure reduction or elimination of threats consistent with NPS management policies, tribal traditional values and historic preservation law.
• Public access to historic properties on tribal lands is managed by the respective tribes. On lands administered by the NPS, access to some sites for users of the river corridor is maintained as long as integrity of the sites in not compromised.

Tribal Ecological Knowledge
Cultural Resources Library
Tribal Perspectives

Updates

2021 DisturbanceType.JPG
https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf
2021 Summary.JPG
https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2022-01-13-twg-meeting/20220113-AnnualReportingMeeting-2021LTEMPArchaeologicalSiteSection106Monitoring-508-UCRO.pdf
AeolianOptions.jpg
https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf
AeolianTypes.jpg
https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17jan26/AR5_Sankey.pdf


Information and Links

Cultural Projects

Stakeholder Questions

  • Does aeolian sand transport research support the use of anthropogenic sand bar building as a means to provide a source of aeolian sands to preserve and protect archaeological sites or would current stabilization measures carried out by the NPS be more likely to be successful, predictable, and immediate at protecting archaeological sites?

Collin et al. 2016:

  • Aeolian deposition was found at 4 of 13 sites (30%) where partial infilling occurred preventing further erosion.
  • “Despite this promise for archaeological site preservation, our observations show that gully annealing can only occur under a specific set of conditions related to fluvial sand availability and wind transport direction.”

Papers and Presentations

2024

2023'

2022

2020

2018

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Other Stuff