ARCHAEOLOGICAL STABILIZATION GUIDE · Archaeological Stabilization Guide 5 Destabilization Issue: Unauthorized digging/looting Location: The Block-Sterns site is located in eastern

FLORIDAHERITAGE

PRESERVING AND

PROTECTING

FLORIDA'S ARCHAEOLOGICAL

SITES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS

ARCHAEOLOGICAL STABILIZATION GUIDEARCHAEOLOGICAL STABILIZATION GUIDECASE STUDIES IN PROTECTING ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITESCASE STUDIES IN PROTECTING ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES

Archaeological Stabilization Guide2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

T he Archaeological Stabilization Guide was prepared as part of a largerproject entitled Cultural Resource Protection in the Coastal Zone. Thepurpose of the project has been to develop and implement strategies for

protecting sites on private land. The project was made possible by a subgrantfrom the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Florida CoastalManagement Program, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Commerce,National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The Guide was created by: Mary Glowacki, Jim Miller, Brenda Swann andLouis Tesar, updated in 2004 by Amanda Evans. However, it would not havebeen possible without the help of many individuals and organizations. Fromthe Florida Division of Historical Resources,we thank the former Directors,George W. Percy and Dr. Janet Snyder Matthews. Jim Miller, formerly theChief of the Bureau of Archaeological Research developed the proposal andadministered the project. Additionally, we thank Henry Baker, CharlyBranham, James Christie, Melissa Memory, Andrew Myers, ChristineNewman, and Ryan Wheeler in the Bureau of Archaeological Research, andSusan Harp in the Bureau of Historic Preservation.

We also wish to thank the Florida Department of Environmental Protection(DEP), Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems for valuable information onerosion. Special thanks go to Steve Martin, Division of Recreation and Parks,Bureau of Natural and Cultural Resources, for recommending case studiesand providing accompanying photos. We also thank Jeanne-Marie Warzeskiof that office for loaning photos.

Robert Thorne of the National Clearinghouse for Archaeological SiteStabilization provided numerous published sources on site stabilization forwhich we are grateful.

Finally, we would like to acknowledge the assistance of the many land managersand other individuals who have provided us with information on specificcase studies, and who have been personally involved in their stabilization.They include Bill Burger, Charles Dutoit, Sonia Gray, Jeff Mauch, JeanneParks and Benny Woodham. We additionally thank Bill Burger for supplyingus with the front-cover photo of the eroded mound (8MA27), which so clearlyshows the effects of erosion.

Archaeological Stabilization Guide 3

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 4

CASE STUDIES ................................................................................................................................................ 5

BLOCK-STERNS (LE148) .................................................................................................................. 5

CRYSTAL RIVER STATE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE (CI1) ...................................................... 6

EMERSON POINT/SNEAD ISLAND TEMPLE MOUND/PORTAVANTINDIAN MOUND SITE (MA919) ................................................................................................. 7

FORT SAN MARCOS DE APALACHEE (WA26) ............................................................................ 8

MILL POINT 3 (HI18) ........................................................................................................................ 9

MOUND AVENUE MOUND (VO240) ............................................................................................... 10

MOUND KEY (LL2) ............................................................................................................................ 11

MOUNT ELIZABETH (MT30) .......................................................................................................... 12

MUNYON ISLAND SITE (PB79) ...................................................................................................... 13

NOCOROCO AND MOUNT OSWALD (VO82) ............................................................................... 14

PEACOCK SPRINGS SITE (SU121) ................................................................................................. 15

SHELL BLUFF LANDING (SJ32) ..................................................................................................... 16

VELDA MOUND (LE44) ..................................................................................................................... 18

ORGANIZATIONS AND ASSISTANCE ........................................................................................................ 19

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................. 21

ARCHAEOLOGICAL STABILIZATION GUIDE:Case Studies in Stabilizing Archaeological Sites


INTRODUCTION

T he Archaeological Stabilization Guide was created to assist private propertyowners to stabilize archaeological sites in their stewardship. The purposeof this guide is to present practical solutions to stabilization problems

through case studies at public and private archaeological sites. The guide isdivided into two parts—case studies and useful resources. The case studiesillustrate some of the leading causes of site destabilization, correspondingstabilization solutions, and the effectiveness of these solutions in reducing oreliminating loss of sites. There are many factors that contribute to thedestabilization of archaeological sites. Some of the most common in Floridaare: shoreline water levels, currents, and surges; torrential rain and wind;vehicular and pedestrian traffic; invasive or intrusive vegetation; unauthorizeddigging; vandalism; and development. The second part of the guide providesa list of organizations and references to consult when faced with a particularstabilization problem.

The Stabilization Guide is part of a series of how-to guides for managingarchaeological sites. Although written for private landowners, the principles ofsite protection are similar on public lands. For an overview of various threats andprotective measures, see Best Management Practices: An Owner’s Guide toProtecting Archaeological Sites also available from the Florida Division ofHistorical Resources. The Division and the Department of State manage a widevariety of programs to promote Florida’s rich cultural heritage. For moreinformation about archaeology, historic preservation, museums, and folklife, visitour web page at www.flheritage.com. Thank you for helping protect our uniqueand irreplaceable cultural resources.


Destabilization Issue: Unauthorized digging/looting

Location: The Block-Sterns site is located in easternLeon County, Florida, adjacent to Piney-Z Lake, anartificially created segment of Lake Lafayette.

Site Description: The Block-Sterns site complexconsists of four earthen mounds, probably used as burialmounds, and an extensive associated village area. Thesite was occupied from at least the Middle Archaicthrough Fort Walton periods (ca., 7000 B.C.-A.D. 1600);however, it is most noted for its late Deptford throughWeeden Island period occupations. Artifacts representingthe late Paleoindian and Early Archaic (ca. 10,000-7000B.C.) and later Leon-Jefferson and Territorial periodshave also been found in the general area.

Site Owner/Manager: The City of Tallahassee, LeonCounty, and private individuals own various portions ofthis site complex. The Tallahassee-Leon County Parks &Recreation Department manages the publicly accessibleportion of the site.

Map of eastern Leon County, Florida, showing location of Block-Sterns site.

Block-Sterns lithic artifacts. Lootingarchaeological sites destroys thecontext of artifacts and preventsreconstructing the culture and historyassociated with them.

Project: Block-Sterns (LE148)

Contributing Organizations:Tallahassee-Leon County Parks &Recreation Department; Florida Division ofHistorical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research; Florida Fish andWildlife Conservation Commission; localconcerned citizens.

Management Problems: Unauthorized digging/looting.

Management Solutions: Warning signs have beenposted at the mounds, and Florida Wildlife Officerspatrol the site and have arrested and prosecuted some ofthe looters. Looter holes are backfilled to prevent furtherdamage to the site, such as erosion and mound collapse.Removal of understory brush and vines that block theview of the mounds is planned. An interpretive trail, partof the Lafayette Heritage Trail, is planned in response toa growing public interest.

Outcome: Publicity from the arrest and prosecutionof site looters has resulted in fewer incidents ofillegal digging. Site managers expect increased publicvisitation to further reduce site looting incidents.


Destabilization Issues: Foot traffic; shoreline erosiondue to currents and boat wakes

Location: The site is situated on the north side ofCrystal River, two miles west of the town of CrystalRiver, and four miles east of the Gulf of Mexico, inCitrus County, Florida.

Site Description: Crystal River is a prehistoricceremonial complex and burial site consisting of tentemple, burial, shell, and sand mounds. The site wasoccupied during the Deptford, Weeden Island, andSafety Harbor periods (ca. 200 B.C.-A.D. 1000).

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns mostof the site, and the Department of EnvironmentalProtection, Division of Recreation and Parks managesthe site.

Contributing Organizations: Department of State,Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research; Department of EnvironmentalProtection, Division of Recreation and Parks; GulfArchaeology Research Institute.

Management Problems: (1) Erosion on mound slopedue to uncontrolled pedestrian traffic, and (2) loss ofarchaeological deposits due to seawall collapse andneeded repair. Boat wakes and natural shorelineerosion contribute to site loss that the seawall isintended to prevent.

Above: Mound with access ramp, CrystalRiver State Archaeological Site.

To the left is the seawallprotecting the back face ofCrystal River mound. Aseawall is a structureseparating land and waterareas primarily to preventerosion and other damagecaused by wave action.

Left: Diagram of erosion dueto currents and boat wake.

Right: Diagram of seawall

Project: Crystal River State Archaeological Site (CI1)

Management Solutions: (1)Construction of an access stairway over theeroding pedestrian access trail; and (2)repair of the collapsed seawall includingremoval of the fallen portion, recovery oferoded cultural deposits (some of which werelayered on the submerged seawall, while intactremains were discovered in the river bottom), theinstallation of steel support rods, and the excavation andbackfill of the area where support rods were placed. Thearchaeological deposits are protected by the seawall.

Outcome: (1) The stairway has stabilized the erosionproblem on the mound and enhanced visitor access to it;and (2) seawall replacement revealed intact culturalremains and much less site disturbance than expected inthe seawall area. The new seawall will serve to protectthese remains and future researchers and site managerswill know to consider the sensitive nature of thisshoreline site area before initiating any resourcemanagement effort. A fence was installed along the riverside of Temple Mound “A” to stop visitors from walkingup the side of the mound. Additionally, a large tree thatwas located on the top of the mound was cut off atground level to prevent the tree from falling down in astorm and the root system destroying part of the mound.


Destabilization Issues: Shoreline erosion; foot traffic;invasive vegetation; looting/unauthorized digging

Location: The Emerson Point site is located on thesouthern shore of Snead Island, a Gulf Coast barrierisland in northwestern Manatee County, along Florida’scentral Gulf Coast.

Site Description: The Emerson Point site complexconsists of a flat-topped temple mound, a low platformmound, several midden mounds and shell ridges, and aplaza area. The site dates from the Late ManasotaPeriod, Safety Harbor Period, and Leon-Jefferson Period(ca. A.D. 800-1748).

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns thissite complex, and Manatee County Public ServicesDepartment manages it.

Contributing Organizations: Tampa Bay NationalEstuary Program; Southwest Florida Water ManagementDistrict; Florida Department of Environmental Protection;Manatee County Public Services Department; GreinerEngineering; Manatee County Prison.

Management Problems: Shoreline erosion is damagingthe Manatee River side of the Portavant Mound, andlooting has occurred in erosion-exposed areas. Exoticvegetation and foot traffic have destabilized the site,particularly the mound areas.

Management Solutions: Exotic vegetation was manuallyremoved from archaeologically sensitive areas. A staircasewas constructed on the principal mound to avoid

Shell midden showingdamage due tofoot traffic.

Project: Emerson Point/Snead Island Temple Mound/Portavant Indian Mound site (MA919)

destabilization from foot traffic. Thestaircase was constructed with four blocks atthe base and laid directly on the side of themound, causing as little intrusive damage aspossible. Areas adjacent to the staircase thatcould have been affected by its installation weremonitored for any possible exposure ordisturbance of cultural material. A revetment, including re-vegetation of mangroves, on the shoreline of PortavantMound has been proposed to decrease erosion and perhapsthe looting caused by erosion.

Outcome: The exotic vegetation removal is ongoing andhas decreased damage caused by the invasive vegetation.The staircase has been successful in reducing damage frompedestrian traffic. The revetment proposal has beenapproved by the managing agency, which is currentlyapplying for grants to build the revetment. Until therevetment is constructed, erosion and looting will continue.

Aerial photo of Emerson Point


Destabilization Issues: Erosion due to water currentsand boat wake; unauthorized digging/looting

Location: Fort San Marcos de Apalache is located at theconfluence of the Wakulla and St. Marks Rivers inWakulla County, Florida.

Site Description: Fort San Marcos has been the site oftwo Spanish forts. The first was constructed of wood inthe late 1600s. A sturdier limestone structure was built inthe mid- to late-1700s.

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns thesite, and the Department of Environmental Protection,Division of Recreation and Parks manages the site.

Contributing Organizations: Department of State,Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research; Department of EnvironmentalProtection, Division of Recreation and Parks; City ofSt. Marks.

Management Problems: The site is threatened byshoreline erosion, structural deterioration, and looting.Archaeological features of the fort are being eroded intothe St. Marks and Wakulla Rivers, with erosionaccelerated by oil barge and other boat traffic. Along theSt. Marks River bank, archaeological features includewooden pilings and other structural members, andartifacts associated with an early to mid-19th-centurywharf, marine ways, other structures, and possibly an

Project: Fort San Marcos de Apalache (WA26)

earlier barrel well. Along the WakullaRiver side, a cut limestone fort wall has foryears been eroding and collapsing, therebythreatening the integrity of the site protectedby the wall.

Management Solutions: In addition toresource documentation, protective measuresneed to be planned and implemented along the St. MarksRiver. A bulkhead was constructed as a temporarymeasure for one portion of the cut stone fort wall alongthe Wakulla River shoreline.

Outcome: Along the Wakulla River, settling andwashout of sand backfill behind the bulkhead arecreating indentations on the surface, requiring routinefilling. Sand is slowly being lost from the revetment, andit shows signs of movement, suggesting the need forstructural design modifications.

Shoreline erosion offort wall, Fort SanMarcos de Apalache,before construction ofa protective bulkhead.

These photos show fortwall bulkheadconstruction duringdifferent phases.

A bulkhead is a structurethat retains or prevents land fromsliding into the water or protects itfrom wave damage. It functionsmuch like a seawall (see CrystalRiver case study for seawallillustrations).


Destabilization Issue: Development causing grounddisturbance

Location: The site of Mill Point 3 is located on the northbank of the Alafia River, where the river is crossed byU.S. 41 in Williams Park, Hillsborough County.

Site Description: Mill Point 3 is a shell mound which ispart of a larger archaeological complex of shell mounds,middens, and fields associated with the Weeden Islandculture (ca. A.D. 450-1000).

Site Owner/Manager: Hillsborough County

Contributing Organizations: Hillsborough CountyParks and Recreation Department; Department of State,Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research; Dr. Brent Weisman,Department of Anthropology, University of SouthFlorida; Cargill Fertilizer plant; Kimmons ContractingCompany.

Management Problems: Road construction and thedevelopment of the nearby Cargill fertilizer plant haddisturbed much of the site complex. Mill Point 3 itself issituated in the vicinity of a previously abandoned trailerhome with a septic tank, which Cargill Fertilizer used asa security facility during its ownership of the property.County park managers had been interested in removingthe remains of the facility in developing the park. Duringthe initial phase of this work, while removing a chainlink fence surrounding the trailer, a precolumbian humanjawbone was discovered. This prompted the involvementof the Bureau of Archaeological Research.

Diagram by Ryan J. Wheeler

Project: Mill Point 3 (HI18)

Management Solutions: Because theremoval process was consideredpotentially damaging to the site, a scopeof work was drafted with recommendationsfrom Dr. Ryan Wheeler, ArchaeologySupervisor in the Bureau of ArchaeologicalResearch. Dr. Wheeler visited the Mill Point siteto assess the status of unmarked human burial remains.Recommendations were to dismantle and remove thetrailer, and crush the septic tank and backfill itwithin a protective area, so as not to damage the mound.A safety fence with low impact posts would be erectedto keep demolition activities inside the yard of thetrailer. The work would also include removal of concretepads, located next to the trailer, although leaving them inplace could protect underlying site remains. A certifiedarchaeological monitor was recommended to be presentduring the removal and stabilization processes, shouldany ground disturbing activities occur. Capping the sitewith a layer of organic soil and planting sod could helpprotect and stabilize the mound.

Outcome: On June 14, 1999, Kimmons ContractingCompany removed the mobile home, pumped out andcrushed the septic tank, and removed the orange safetyfence surrounding the site. The concrete slab was left inplace. Jill Lehman of Hillsborough County Parks andRecreation supervised the work. The area was mowedand grass allowed to spread to serve as a protectivecover as well as to conceal the archaeological remains.The park plans to install posts around the perimeter ofthe area to keep out vehicles.

Location of shell mound in relationto trailer home and septic tank.


Destabilization Issues: Unauthorized digging/looting;residential development

Location: The Mound Avenue Mound is located withinthe town of Ormond Beach near the western shoreline ofIndian River in Volusia County, Florida.

Site Description: The Mound Avenue Mound is a multi-component site dating from St. Johns I through earlyhistoric times (ca. 500 B.C. - A.D. 1600). The mound isan elevated earthen feature used as a place of burial bygenerations of Native Americans occupying thesurrounding village area. The site has been listed on theNational Register of Historic Places and has been aNational Historic Landmark since 1966.

Site Owner/Manager: Town of Ormond Beach/OrmondBeach Parks Department.

Contributing Organizations: Town of Ormond Beach;Volusia Anthropological Society (FAS chapter); Museumof Arts and Sciences, Daytona Beach; Department ofState, Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research.

Management Problems: The mound was subjected tounauthorized digging/looting. Some damage occuredduring initial landscaping and site preparation forplanned residential use in which the owner planned tolevel the mound.

Project: Mound Avenue Mound (VO240)

Management Solutions: Limitedarchaeological excavation demonstrated tothe private owners and the public that themound contained undisturbed burials. TheTown of Ormond Beach owned and managedshoreline portions of the adjacent villagemidden as a public park headquarters. TheVolusia Anthropological Society (VAS) spearheaded afund raising drive, which resulted in acquisition of theproperty and its conveyance to the Town of OrmondBeach for park purposes. The Bureau of ArchaeologicalResearch provided a staff archaeologist to work withOrmond Beach Parks Department and volunteersincluding VAS members, local residents, and BoyScouts. They reburied previously excavated humanremains in the area from which they had been removed,and spread a protective covering over the mound surfaceto restore its original appearance. Additionally, theyinstalled irrigation pipe within the recent organic soil capand layered squares of flower sod to protect the moundsurface from erosion.

Outcome: The mound restoration project brought localand area residents together and created a betterunderstanding of the cultural importance of the NativeAmerican remains, particularly the need to protectNative American burial locations with the same respectand dignity shown more modern cemeteries. There is anearby parking area from which to view the mound.

Above: Mound Avenue Mound being laidwith sod.

Left: Mound Avenue Mound after therevegetation process was completed.Volunteers admire their work after re-vegetating the mound.


Destabilization Issues: Flooding; foot traffic;vandalism; unauthorized digging/looting

Location: The Mound Key site is located on an island inEstero Bay, Lee County, Florida.

Site Description: Mound Key includes burial mounds,shell ridges, shell mounds, canals, and water courts,which cover an area of roughly 125 acres. The site wasoccupied from at least Caloosahatchee I-V (ca., A.D.100 to 1750). It was later used from 1750 until 1945 bySpanish-Cuban, Seminole, and European-Americansettlers. Mound Key was listed on the National Registerof Historic Places on August 12, 1970.

Site Owner/Manager: Themajority of thesite is owned bythe State ofFlorida; a fewoutparcels remainin thehands ofindividual privateowners. TheDepartment ofEnvironmentalProtection,Division ofRecreation andParks manages thesite.

Contributing Organizations: Florida Division ofRecreation and Parks; University of Florida, RandellResearch Center; Department of State, Division ofHistorical Resources, Bureau of ArchaeologicalResearch; Ft. Myers Beach.

Management Problems: This site is primarilythreatened by flooding during high tide, foot traffic,vandalism, and looting. Of special concern are erosiongullies along the trail crossing Mound 1, and looters’holes on this same mound as well as two others. Portionsof the trail, such as along the dredge/borrow pit, areslumping, as are unfilled looter holes. There is minorerosion elsewhere including the southeast landing areaand the area surrounding the interpretive kiosk.

Management Solutions: Suggestions have been madefor the placement of two or more telephone polestairways on top of the trail on the slope of Mound 1.

Trail across Mound 1, Mound Key.

Project: Mound Key (LL2)

Prior to placing the stairway, the trailfurrow (which is a historic trail) would befilled using a combination of sandbags andother fill material. This method has beenused before by the Florida Division ofRecreation and Parks at the Crystal River StateArchaeological Site and has been verysuccessful. Sandbags, backfill, and additional fillmaterial also are recommended to fill looter’s holes. Adetailed topographic map of the site, documentinglooting areas, has been prepared to use in planningrestoration activities and site interpretation.

Outcome: Mound Key park manager, Jeanne Parks, hasreceived funding from the State, and along withvolunteers, is implementing stabilization efforts. She isconsidering employing a cement conveyer to transportsand directly to areas requiring fill. This would eliminatethe need to walk across the shoreline where themangroves, with large protruding roots, are located.


Stabilization Issues: Erosion due to currents, boatwakes, storm surges, and high storm winds and heavyrain; vandalism

Location: The Mount Elizabeth site is located on thewest bank of the Indian River (the IntracoastalWaterway) in the Indian Riverside Park, Martin County,Florida.

Site Description: The site is a large, estuarine, coastalmidden containing Late Archaic and early St. Johnsprehistoric components (ca., 1000 B.C.-A.D. 1), withAmerican 19th-and 20th-century occupations.

Site Owner/Manager: Martin County.

Contributing Organizations: Martin County; SoutheastFlorida Archaeological Society (SEFAS).

Management Problems: The site has sustainedsubstantial damage, particularly due to vandalism, sinceit was first cleared in the late 19th century. The IndianRiver side of the site is eroding as a consequence ofwave and storm action along the Intracoastal Waterway.Mount Elizabeth is particularly susceptible to damagecaused by tropical storms and hurricanes, in addition tonortheasters and periods of unusually severe weatherpatterns associated with El Niño.

Management Solutions: In their 1998 culturalassessment report on the site, the archaeological contract

The photo above shows deflation on the eastern side of Mt. Elizabeth,a condition where heavy artifacts are left in a thin layer after the soilmatrix has blown or washed away.

East side of Mt. Elizabeth showing erosion of mound into theIndian River Lagoon. Note the exotic Brazilian peppers coveringthe mound.

Project: Mount Elizabeth (MT30)

firm, Janus Research, recommended thatthe Mount Elizabeth site be designated asgreenspace within the proposed largerpublic Indian Riverside Park. The firmrecommended that the site be stabilized byrevegetating it with select native plant speciesand possibly sod.

In 1999 Martin County received matching grant fundsfrom the Division of Historical Resources to develop astabilization plan to preserve the site. The Countyindicates that all attempts will be made to avoid orminimize ground-disturbing activities within both denseand sparse midden areas. Exotic plants in these areaswill be removed by hand, when possible, and only toground level. Stumps and roots will be destroyed usingherbicides. Because erosion of the river will becomemore severe when the existing exotic vegetation isremoved, replanting these areas with native groundcover is planned. If this does not provide sufficientsupport to reduce erosion, sod or grass matting will beused instead. Demolition or removal of buildings will beconfined to areas that do not contain midden or thatcontain only redeposited midden.

Outcome: Martin County has hired contractors, anarchaeologist and a coastal engineer to develop aspecific work plan for site stabilization efforts. The workis slated for the summer and fall of 2000, with a 2001completion date.


Stabilization Issues: Invasive vegetation; vehiculartraffic; water current and boat wake erosion;unauthorized digging/looting

Location: The Munyon Island Site, located on MunyonIsland in Lake Worth, is included within the boundariesof the John D. MacArthur Beach State Park in PalmBeach County, Florida.

Site Description: The site consists of three modestprehistoric shell middens and a historic homestead, aswell as other structures dating to the 19th and 20th

centuries. The island was visited by early Floridians,probably on a seasonal basis, for fish, game, and otherresources. From the Third Seminole War onward, therewas a series of non-Indian occupations. These included19th - century homesteading; operation of the HotelHygeia, an early 1900s spa; WWII American militaryparade grounds; and a mid- to late 20th- century privateresidence.

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns theproperty, and the Department of EnvironmentalProtection, Division of Recreation and Parks managesthe park.

Contributing Organizations: Florida Division ofRecreation and Parks; Palm Beach County; Departmentof the Army, Corps of Engineers; Department of State,Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research.

Historic seawall and dock area at Munyon Island.

Mulched area showing plant holes from vegetation effort,Munyon Island Site.

Project: Munyon Island Site (PB79)

Management Problems: The spread ofexotic plants and trees, vehicular traffic,shoreline erosion, and looting weredestabilizing the site.

Management Solutions: As part of an islandrestoration project in 1996, exotic plants andtrees were removed by basal bark herbicidetreatment, and manual and mechanized methods.Herbicide and manual methods were employed in areaswith historic architectural remains to avoid or minimizedamage. To prevent erosion and restore the naturalenvironmental setting, exposed areas of the historicisland ground surface were covered with wood chips,creating a rich organic topsoil. Selected nativevegetation was also planted in areas that would notdisturb archaeological and historical sites. To countershoreline erosion, riprap (rock placed on a streambank toprevent erosion) was placed along selected areas subjectto wave action. The earthen causeway to the island wasbreached to restore tidal circulation and eliminatevehicular access.

Outcome: As of March 1999, Assistant Park Manager,Patrick Rash, reported that protective measures havebeen successful, although removal of exotic plantscontinues on a regular basis due to the productivity oftheir seedbeds. Riprap is also holding well.


Damage from pedestrian traffic at the Nocoroco/Mount Oswald site.

Stabilization Issues: Erosion due to water currents andboat wakes; unauthorized digging/looting; foot traffic

Location: The Nocoroco site and Mount OswaldPlantation are located on the northern tip of the Tomokapeninsula in the northeastern part of Tomoka State Park,Volusia County, Florida.

Site Description: The Nocoroco site is represented by ablack earth and shell midden comprising the remains of aTimucuan village, first reported by the Spanish explorerAlvaro Mexía in 1605. Ceramic styles from Orange, St.Johns I & II, and St. Augustine periods indicate thatnatives first inhabited the site around 1500 B.C. It was stilloccupied at the time of Mexía’s visit. The site has beenlisted on the National Register of Historic Places since1973. The remains of the Mount Oswald site includevarious 18th-century artifacts, including wrought iron nailsand pearlware ceramic sherds. The Mount OswaldPlantation overlaps the site of Nocoroco and is named afterRichard Oswald, who received a 20,000-acre land grantfrom the British government in 1774. Oswald used hisland to cultivate indigo, for which he brought 34 skilledcraftsman and their families and 100 slaves to the site.Eventually, the number of slaves on Oswald’s indigoplantation grew to 240.

Map of site.

Project: Nocoroco and Mount Oswald (VO82)

Site Owner/Manager: The State ofFlorida owns this site, and the Departmentof Environmental Protection, Division ofRecreation and Parks manages the site.

Contributing Organizations: FloridaDepartment of Environmental Protection,Division of Recreation and Parks.

Management Problems: Shoreline erosion hasthreatened much of the site. Pedestrian foot traffic alsothreatens the site, as does looting/unauthorized digging.

Management Solutions: Installation of geo-webbing(heavy, coarse fabric put down under sand or rock toprevent washout of sand materials) along the shorelinewould help stabilize the shoreline, and recontouring theriverbank would also facilitate shoreline stabilization toprotect the remaining site area from further loss. AmericanPreservation Consultants, Inc., while investigating MountOswald, recommended in 1999, as Bruce Piatek andAssociates had in 1992, that fill be added to pedestriantrails and public access to the sites be limited to preventfurther damage due to foot traffic and looting.

Outcome: In 1995 an archaeological investigation wasperformed at the request of the Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection to determine that noarchaeological remains would be disturbed during theinstallation of geo-webbing to stop river bank erosion.After completing the investigation, the contractor, FloridaArchaeological Services, Inc., recommended that theproject proceed, as midden was determined to be overlainby 80-160 cm of dredge fill, effectively protecting itagainst adverse impact. The geo-webbing has successfullyreduced river bank erosion. Additionally, park managersadded fill to walkways and have prohibited parkingnear the archaeological sites. Both of these actionshave dramatically decreased damage from foot trafficand looting.


Destabilization Issue: Unauthorized digging/looting

Location: The Peacock Springs site, one of sixarchaeological sites identified in the Peacock SpringsState Recreation Area, is located north of the SuwanneeRiver, two miles east of Luraville, in Suwannee County,Florida.

Site Description: This site is a prehistoric habitationsite, possibly a village. It covers an area ofapproximately 187,000 square meters and is representedby at least three cultural periods including Orange(3500-1500 B.C.), followed by Early Weeden Island(A.D. 400-750) and Suwannee River (A.D. 750-1500).

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns thissite, and the Department of Environmental Protection,Division of Recreation and Parks manages the site.

Contributing Organizations: Department of State,Division of Historical Resources, Bureau of

Project: Peacock Springs site (SU121)

Archaeological Research; Department ofEnvironmental Protection, Division ofRecreation and Parks; Florida Institute ofPark Personnel (FIPP).

Management Problems: The site wascultivated, and unauthorized digging leftnumerous looter holes prior to state acquisition.

Management Solutions: The looter holes werebackfilled, and a sign was posted identifying the site’slocation and significance, as well as the laws protectingit. Grass and other vegetation was planted to create aprotective cover, stabilizing the site. Grass was selectedbecause of its minimal root system, affecting only thealready disturbed plow zone.

Outcome: Project managers report that the site remainsstable due to the protective measures, and looting hasalso decreased.

Location of vandal pits at 8SU121, Peacock Springs Recreation Area. Diagram taken from C.A.R.L. ArchaeologicalSurvey Report.


Plan of protective bulkhead. Diagram from U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers Waterways Experiment Station 1990.

Stabilization Issues: Erosion due to tides, waves andwakes caused by boats

Location: Shell Bluff Landing site is located along theeastern shoreline of the Tolomato River on the west sideof the Guana River Peninsula in St. Johns County,Florida.

Site Description: The site is an extensive shell midden,containing materials dating from the Late ArchaicOrange Period, the Florida Transitional Period, the St.Johns I & II periods, the 17th-century and early 19th-century Spanish occupations, and the American period,(ca. 2000 B.C. to the present). The site has been listedon the National Register since 1991.

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns thesite, and the Department of Environmental Protection,Division of Recreation and Parks manages the site.

Contributing Organizations: Florida Department ofState, Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research; Department of EnvironmentalProtection, Division of Recreation and Parks; FloridaDepartment of Transportation; U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers Waterways Experiment Station.

Management Problems: This site is threatened bycoastal tidal fluctuation, wave action resulting from boattraffic and wind, and to some degree, the continuing risein sea level.

Management Solutions: From 1984 to 1985 theDepartment of Environmental Protection (DEP),Division of Recreation and Parks, built a woodenbulkhead as a temporary measure to protect a 19th-century coquina well within the site, located on the rivershore. In 1987, the U.S. Army Corps of EngineersWaterways Experiment Station initiated an erosion-

Project: Shell Bluff Landing site (SJ32)

monitoring project, in which the rate oferosion across the western face of the sitewas measured. In 1992, the DEP placedriprap and geo-webbing along the shoreline.To stabilize the shoreline, park staff areutilizing boulder riprap, which is occasionallyrenewed.

Storm-damaged bulkhead.


Project: Shell Bluff Landing site (SJ32) continued...

Riprap, or layers of stone placed along a shoreline to prevent erosion,and geo-webbing create a revetment for the Shell Bluff site.

The results of the Corps of Engineers study suggestedthat a “no wake” zone should be established along theIntracoastal Waterway from north of Shell Bluff to theconfluence of the Tolomato and Guana Rivers. Theproject concluded that while the percentage of damagedirectly resulting from boat wakes, especiallyIntracoastal Waterway barge traffic, could not beaccurately determined, the reduction of wake-relatedwave action could only have a beneficial effect in termsof site preservation. Recommendations for the nextphase of this work include: 1) continuation ofmonitoring at six month intervals for at least two moreyears, fixed camera and photographic monitoring,

A revetment is a structure placed on a bank to absorb the impact of incoming waves.

2) completion of an accurate topographicmap of the site west of the baseline, 3) aninterdisciplinary literature search to broadenthe current view of erosion at Shell Bluff, and4) the preparation of a long-term plan for sitemanagement addressing salvage and sitetesting, as well as other strategies for reducingthe effects of erosion.

From 1991 to 1992, the Department of EnvironmentalProtection, Division of Recreation and Parks, funded bya grant from the Division of Historical Resources,carried out stabilization efforts at Guana River StatePark. This consisted of placing coquina riprap, filtercloth, and geo-webbing along the shoreline of the ShellBluff site to control erosion. Shortly after the completionof this work, a major storm washed out roughly 75% ofthe erosion-protective material. The project wouldpossibly have been more successful had more timeelapsed between its completion and the storm. However,had the revetment not been created, erosional damagewould probably have been far worse.

Outcome: Replenishment of the boulders will be anongoing activity because of the relatively high energycoastline of the Tolomato River. How often this willhave to be done will depend on natural forces and alsoon boat traffic along the river.


Stabilization Issues: Unauthorized digging/looting;vandalism; residential development

Location: Velda Mound is located in the Arbor Hillneighborhood, north of Tallahassee, in Leon County,Florida.

Site Description: During the occupation of the VeldaMound site by the Apalachee (ca.1450A.D. –1625 A.D.),the mound is believed to have served as the foundationplatform for the residence of a village leader. Domesticresidences with garden plots as well as communal fieldswould have occupied the area surrounding the mound, andthe mound probably functioned much like a town hall forpeople living in the nearby countryside. It was abandonedaround the beginning of the Spanish Mission Period (ca.1565), probably due to the depletion of natural resources inthe vicinity, such as trees used for firewood and buildingmaterials, and exhaustion of fertile soil for farming. Noarchaeological evidence of occupation in the area bycolonial Spain or Britain exists, but they may have knownabout the mound. By the 1940s, the Velda Mound areabecame part of the Velda Dairy Farm.

Site Owner/Manager: The State of Florida owns this site,and Department of State, Division of Historical Resources,Bureau of Archaeological Research manages the site.

Contributing Organizations: Florida Department ofState, Division of Historical Resources, Bureau ofArchaeological Research; Panhandle ArchaeologicalSociety at Tallahassee (P.A.S.T.); Arbor HillNeighborhood Association.

Project: Velda Mound (LE44)

Management Problems: During the1950s, while the property was a part of thedairy, someone bulldozed a trench across themound. Later, pot hunters are reported to haveexcavated a large hole near the center of themound. In 1973, the Velda Dairy property beganto be developed into a housing complex known asArbor Hill. Over the next decade, three developers sequen-tially owned the property. More recently, the site becamean unauthorized trash dump.

Management Solutions: The trench bulldozed in the1950s should be filled in to prevent wind and storm erosionfrom destroying the mound further. Turning the site into apublicly owned local neighborhood park will promotepublic awareness of the site, which will decrease lootingand dumping of trash. Establishing a local site monitorwill further decrease the likelihood of unauthorizeddigging and vandalism.

Outcome: In 1982 developers donated a 1.91-acre parcelcontaining the mound to the State for preservation. In1999 the Bureau of Archaeological Research filled in thetrench and began work to establish the Velda Mound Parkwithin the 1.91-acre lot. P.A.S.T. volunteers helped clearthe site of trash and debris. A mulch trail was addedaround the mound and over the top of the mound, directlyabove the filled-in trench. Picnic tables were installed,along with signs to direct visitors to stay on the path, toidentify the park, and to interpret the site. P.A.S.T. andArbor Hill Neighborhood Association have agreed tomonitor the site for vandalism and looting activities, andwill contact the Bureau should these activities take place.The establishment of a park and site monitors have in-creased local awareness of the significance of the moundand greatly decreased the chances of future looting andvandalism to the site.

Map with mulch trail.Velda Mound Park.

The equipment (right) isfilling in the trench tostabilize the mound. Themulch trail was laid acrossthe filled portion of themound to permit visitoraccess.

The photograph above shows damage to VeldaMound before it was restored to its currentappearance. The trench (left portion of photo),cut through it by a bulldozer, was dug to recoverartifacts, destroying a sizeable area along withinformation about the prehistoric occupation ofthe site.


Florida Department of StatePlease feel free to contact the Department of State,Division of Historical Resources for help in decidingwhich of these programs or organizations may beappropriate for your archaeological site.

Division of Historical ResourcesAddress: The Florida Department of State

Division of Historical ResourcesBureau of Archaeological Research500 South Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399-0250

Phone: (850) 245-6444Internet: www.flheritage.com/archaeology

Funding for Site PreservationState grants are available on a competitive basis togovernment agencies and not-for-profit organizations forsite preservation including archaeological sitestabilization. An individual property owner cancooperate with a not-for-profit organization to apply formatching funds. For further information, contact:

Historic Preservation Grants ProgramAddress: The Florida Department of State

Division of Historical ResourcesBureau of Historic Preservation500 South Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399-0250

Phone: (850) 245-6333Internet: www.flheritage.com/grants

ORGANIZATIONS AND ASSISTANCE

Organizations for PublicSupport and EducationThere is a broad array of archaeological expertiseavailable through various private, state, and federalarchaeological programs and organizations. Publicarchaeology programs increase awareness of the past,encourage respect for heritage resources, explain theimportance of archaeological research and promotecultural resources to the public. A few are listed below:

Archaeological Resources ManagementTraining Program (ARM)

Address: The Florida Department of StateDivision of Historical ResourcesBureau of Archaeological Research500 South Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399-0250

Phone: (850) 245-6444Internet: www.flheritage.com/archaeology/

education/training/

Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA)Address: 15245 Shady Grove Road, Ste. 130

Rockville, MD 20850Phone: (301) 990-2454Internet: www.sha.org

Society for American Archaeology (SAA)Address: 900 Second Street, N.E., Number 12

Washington, D.C. 20002-3557Phone: (202) 789-8200Internet: www.saa.org

Florida Anthropological Society, Inc. (FAS)Address: P.O. Box 608

St. Petersburg, FL 33731Phone: (813) 821-1455Internet: www.fasweb.org

There are many programs and organizations that private landowners canrely on for site preservation and management.


Department of Agriculture, Division ofForestry, Bureau of Forest Management

Address: 3125 Conner BoulevardTallahassee, FL 32399-1650

Phone: (850) 488-4274Internet: www.fl-dof.com

Florida DEP Coastal Management ProgramAddress: 3900 Commonwealth Blvd, MS.47

Tallahassee, FL 32399Phone: (850) 245-2161Internet: www.dep.state.fl.us/cmp

Department of Enviromental Protection,Beaches and Coastal Systems

Address: 3900 Commonwealth BoulevardTallahassee, FL 32399-3000

Phone: (850) 487-4495Internet: www.dep.state.fl.us/beaches

Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission

Address: 620 S. Meridian StreetTallahassee, FL 32399-1600

Phone: (850) 488-4676Internet: www.floridaconservation.org

Register of ProfessionalArchaeologists (RPA)

Address: 5024-R Campbell BoulevardBaltimore, MD 21236

Phone: (410) 933-3486Internet: www.rpanet.org

The RPA is a good resource, if you are looking for theassistance of an archaeologist. The organization’s website includes a membership list. The RPA can alsoprovide you with a list of individuals working in your

The following organizations can be contacted to provide reference materials and professional assistanceregarding management issues such as erosion control and vegetation removal.

particular area of Florida.

Soil Conservation Service, Plant MaterialCenter (for Florida)

Address: 6335 U.S. 41 N.Brooksville, FL 33512

Phone: (904) 796-9600

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Jacksonville District

Address: Prudential Bldg.701 SanMarco Blvd.Jacksonville, FL 32207

Phone: (904) 232-1606

The Jacksonville district office serves all of Florida eastof the Apalachicola River.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Mobile District

Address: P.O. Box 2288Mobile, AL 36628-0001

The Mobile district office serves all of Florida west ofthe Apalachicola River.

U.S. Army Engineer Waterways ExperimentStation, Environmental Laboratory

Address: P.O. Box 631


REFERENCES

Vicksburg, MS 39180-0631Phone: (601) 634-5012

General Archaeological Site StabilizationAten, Lawrence E.

1986 “Planning the Preservation ofArchaeological Sites” in Rescue Archeology,Papers from the First New World Conferenceon Rescue Archaeology. Edited by Rex L.Wilson and Gloria Loyola. National Trustfor Historic Preservation, Organization ofAmerican States, The Preservation Press,Washington, D.C.

Fowler, Don D.

1986 Conserving American ArchaeologicalResources in American Archaeology Pastand Future. Edited by David J. Mitzer, DonD. Fowler, and Jeremy A. Sabloff, pp.135-162. Society for American Archaeology,Washington, D.C.

Thorne, Robert M.

1991 Intentional Site Burial. A Technique toProtect Against Natural or Mechanical Loss.U.S. Department of the Interior, NationalPark Service, Washington, D.C.

Internet ResourcesBibliography on Cultural Resource ManagementPublications

www.wes.army.mil/el/ccspt/civproj.html

This is a list of publications produced by the UnitedStates Army Corps of Engineers.

Intentional Site Burial: A Technique to Protect AgainstNatural or Mechanical Loss

www.cr.nps.gov/aad/pubs/tch5.htm

This is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineerspublication derived from Thorne (1991) above.

Site Stabilization Information Resources

www.cr.nps.gov/aad/pubs/tch12a.htm

This is a list of publications on archaeologicalsite stabilization produced by the United StatesArmy Corps of Engineers.

Soil Stabilization Products Company, Inc.

www.sspco.org/

The Soil Stabilization Products Company (SSPCo)supplies earthwork, environmental andtransportation services.

General Shoreline ErosionAnonymous

1981 Low Cost Shoreline Protection. U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers. Rogers, Golden &Harpern, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

This brochure discusses effective and inexpensiveways to protect shorelines and archaeological siteslocated along them. It includes useful diagrams anda glossary.

Gilbert, S.

1986 “America Washing Away,” Science Digest(94)8:29-79.

Hayes, Miles O.

1984 “Beach Erosion.” In Coastal ResourceManagement: Development Case Studies,pp. 67-190, edited by John R. Clark.National Park Service, U.S. Department ofthe Interior and U. S. Agency forInternational Development. ResearchPlanning Institute, Inc., Columbia, SouthCarolina.


Heede, Burchard H.

1989 “Control of Coastal Erosion to ProtectArcheological Resources.” In TheArcheological Sites Protection andPreservation Notebook, ASPPN III-8,pp. 1-9. Environmental Impact ResearchProgram, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Waterway Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Hemphill, R.W. and M.E. Bramley

1989 Protection of River and Canal Banks: AGuide to Selection and Design. ConstructionIndustry Research and InformationAssociation, Butterworths, London.

Hemphill and Bramley discuss bank failure,planning and design, natural bank protection,vertical bank protection, and revetments.

Keown, Malcolm P.

1983 Streambank Protection Guidelines. U.S.Army Engineer Waterways ExperimentStation, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

This publication is written in non-technical languageto provide general information to the public onstreambank stabilization. The nature of streams andreasons for streambank erosion and failure arediscussed. A variety of standard streambankstabilization techniques are presented.

Pilkey, O. H. Jr., D. C. Sharma, H. R. Wanless, L. J.Doyle, O. H. Pilkey, Sr., W. J. Neal, and B. L. Gruver

1984 Living with the East Florida Shore. DukeUniversity Press, Durham, North Carolina.

National Research Council

1990 Managing Coastal Erosion. NationalAcademy Press, Washington, D.C.

Thorne, Robert M.

1988 Guidelines for the Organization ofArcheological Site Stabilization Projects: AModeled Approach. U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, Washington, D.C.

This publication has a useful table listing theadvantages and disadvantages of different methodsof shoreline protection.

Walton, T.D., Jr.

1979 “Coastal Erosion—Some Causes and SomeConsequences: With Special Emphasis onthe State of Florida,” Shore and Beach47:7-12.

Internet ResourcesInternational Erosion Control Association

ieca.org/

A non-profit, member organization that provideseducation, resource information and businessopportunities for professionals in the erosion andsediment control industry.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Officeof Beaches and Coastal Systems

www.dep.state.fl.us/beach/

Provides information about shoreline erosion andcontrol in Florida.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association

state-of-coast.noaa.gov/default.html

Provides general information about shoreline erosionand control in the United States.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, JacksonvilleDistrict Office

www.saj.usace.army.mil/

For local access to the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, the Jacksonville District Office coversall of Florida east of the Appalachicola River.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District Office

www.sam.usace.army.mil/

The Mobile District Office covers that part ofFlorida west of the Appalachicola River.

REFERENCES (CONTINUED)


Mechanical Erosion ControlAnonymous

1985 “Erosion Control Mesh Has EnvironmentalAdvantages” in Grounds Maintenance, p.50.

Describes the cost and use of Enkamat, a nylonmesh, as an alternative to concrete riprap and asphaltfor lining ditches and covering embankments.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

1986 Coastal Construction Manual.FEMA-55/February.

This is a detailed manual on the construction ofseawalls, revetments, and other forms of engineeredcoastal protection.

Natural Erosion ControlBates, A. Leon, Sidney S. Harper, Kenneth R. Kelley,David H. Webb

1997 Banks and Buffers; A Guide to SelectingNative Plants for Streambanks andShorelines. Clean Waters Initiative Program,Environmental Research Center, TennesseeValley Authority, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

A guide for selecting native plants for stabilizationof streambanks and shorelines in Tennessee andother parts of the eastern U.S.

Broome, S. W., E. D. Seneca, and W. W. Woodhouse, Jr.

1982 Building and Stabilizing Coastal Dunes withVegetation. UNC Sea Grant CollegePublication UNC-SG-82-05, NOAA, U.S.Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.

Heede, Burchard, H.

1989b “Control of Shoreline Erosion by Means ofRevegetation.” In The Archeological SitesProtection and Preservation Notebook,ASPPN V-2, pp. 1-6. Environmental ImpactResearch Program, U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, Waterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Mississippi.

1990 “Vegetation Management on ArcheologicalSites.” In The Archeological Sites Protectionand Preservation Notebook, ASPPN IX-2,pp. 1-4. Environmental Impact ResearchProgram, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Waterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Kautz, Harold M.

1969 “Streambank Protection” in EngineeringField Manual for Conservation Practices.U.S. Department of Agriculture SoilConservation Service, Washington, D.C.(Reprinted 1985).

The author discusses streambank erosion andprotection methods such as channel clearing andsnagging, use of vegetation, willow poles, treerevetment, piling revetment with wire facing,sacks, brush mats and rock riprap.

1990 Revegetation: The Soft Approach toArcheological Site Stabilization. TechnicalBrief No. 8, Archeological AssistanceDivision, National Park Service,Washington, D.C.

This publication presents methods and benefits of re-vegetation for shoreline erosion control.

Thorne, Robert M.1989 Filter Fabric: A Technique for Short-term

Site Stabilization. Technical Brief No. 1.Archaeological Assistance Program, U.S.Department of the Interior, National ParkService, Washington, D.C.

Discusses filter fabrics and their uses inarchaeological site stabilization.

Young, W.C.

1973 “Plants for Shoreline Erosion Control inSouthern Areas of the United States.”Modified by W.C. Ackerman, G.F. White,and E.B. Worthington in Man-Made Lakes:Their Problems and Environmental Effects.Geophysical Monograph Series No. 17,American Geophysical Union.

Discusses various species of plants used forstabilizing eroding shorelines.




Internet ResourcesFilter Fabric: A Technique for Short-term SiteStabilization

www.cr.nps.gov/aad/pubs/tch1.htm

This is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineerspublication derived from Thorne (1989) above.

Literature on Florida Plants

www.flmnh.ufl.edu/natsci/herbarium/bib/

A bibliography compiled by the University ofFlorida Herbarium of selected publications, whichmay be helpful to the study and use of the native,naturalized, and cultivated vegetation of Florida.

University of Florida Aquatic, Wetland and InvasivePlant Information Retrieval System

aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/database.html

A computerized bibliographic database offreshwater aquatic and wetland plants as well asterrestrial and aquatic invasive plants. The databaseincludes citations for more than 51,000 researcharticles, books, and reports about aquatic plantecology, physiology, utilization and control.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission,Land Cover Map showing vegetation types in Florida

www.state.fl.us/gfc/viewing/landcovers/lndcov.html

Bioengineering Group, Inc.

www.bioengineering.com/

A firm “with expertise in the use of vegetation forconstruction projects designed to optimizeenvironmental benefits.” It provides a full range ofconsulting services in the field of bioengineeringfor erosion control, water quality, and habitatrestoration. Techniques employed are mostsuccessful in revegetating areas where flowingwater or soil instability causes accelerated erosion.This firm is located in Salem, Massachusetts, butworks nationwide.

Holmburg Technologies, Inc.

www.erosion.com

Patented beach restoration technology that reverseserosion without the addition of artificial fill, andwithout causing adverse side effects to adjacentshorelines. This firm is located in Sarasota, Florida.

Foot TrafficMacDonald, Anne

1990 Surface Erosion and Disturbance atArcheological Sites: Implications for SitePreservation. U.S. Army EngineerWaterways Experimentation Station.Vicksburg, Mississippi.

This publication discusses surface erosion and otherdisturbances to archaeological sites and is availablefrom National Technical Information Service.

LootingEhrenhard, J. E. (editor)

1990 Coping with Site Looting, SoutheasternPerspectives: Essays in ArcheologicalResource Protection. National Park Service,Interagency Archeological ServicesDivision, Atlanta, Georgia.

Nickens, Paul R.

1993 Use of Signs as a Protective Measure forCultural Resource Sites. Technical ReportEL-93-6, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,Waterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Ryan, Jan S.

1991 Preventing Cultural Resources Destruction:Taking Action Through Interpretation.United States Department of the Interior,National Park Service, Washington, D.C.


Notes


Notes


Notes

R.A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250PH: (850) 245-6444 • FX: (850) 245-6436

WEB: http://www.flheritage.com/archaeology

A Publication of The Florida Department of StateDivision of Historical Resources, Bureau of Archaeological Research

Copyright 2004, Florida Department of State

Designed by: Gelhardt Graphics, Tallahassee, FL

A publication funded in part by the Florida Department ofCommunity Affairs, Florida Coastal Management Program,pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationAward No. NA97OZ0158. The views expressed herein are thoseof the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of theState of Florida, NOAA or any of its subagencies. November 2004

Documents

ARCHAEOLOGICAL STABILIZATION GUIDE · Archaeological Stabilization Guide 5 Destabilization Issue: Unauthorized digging/looting Location: The Block-Sterns site is located in eastern