HISTORIC SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN for SERPENT MOUND

Home , Adena Mansion, Effigy mound, Mound, Serpent Mound

HISTORIC SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN for

SERPENT MOUND

Approved September 10, 2015

Ohio History Connection 800 E. 17th Street Columbus, Ohio 43211

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Introduction 1.2 How to Use This Plan 4 1.3 Methodology 4 1.4 Public Input 5 2.0 SUMMARY OF PRIORITIES 10 2.1 Short-Term Action Steps 10 2.2 Mid-Range Action Steps 11 2.3 Long-Term Action Steps 12 3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 13 3.1 Serpent Mound 13 3.2 Other Cultural Resources 13 3.3 Site Location 15 4.0 OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE OF SERPENT MOUND 16 5.0 CHRONOLOGIC HISTORY OF SERPENT MOUND 17 5.1 Important Dates 17 5.2 Chronology of Ancient History 17 5.3 Historical Chronology 19 5.4 Serpents and American Indian Culture 22 6.0 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 23 6.1 Management Structure 23 6.2 Strategies for Management 24 7.0 BASIC PRINCIPLES for PLANNING and ACTION 27 8.0 PROTECTION OF OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE 31 8.1 Protection Goals 31 8.2 National Instruments of Protection 31 8.3 State Instruments of Protection 32 8.4 Other Instruments of Protection 33 9.0 BUFFER ZONES 35 9.1 Buffer Zones at the Site Entrance 35 9.2 Protection of View Perspectives Outside of Site Property 37 9.3 Buffer Zones within the Site Property 39 9.4 Protection of View Perspectives within the Site Property 40 10.0 RESOURCE CONSERVATION, PROTECTION AND IMPRPOVEMENTS 44 10.1 Steps Through the Tail of the Serpent Mound 44 10.2 Stability of the Bluffs and Ridge 44 10.3 Safety and Security 45 10.4 Existing Visitor Facilities 47 11.0 RESEARCH 49 11.1 Research Informs Management and Interpretation 49 11.2 Serpent Mound in Scientific and Other Literature 50 11.3 Future Research at Serpent Mound 51 11.4 Research Priorities 52 12.0 VISITOR USE OF THE SITE 55 12.1 Visitor Needs and Site Design 55 12.2 Access for People with Disabilities 56 13.3 Event and Access Management 57 13.0 INTERPRETATION and EDUCATION 58 13.1 Interpretative Framework 58 13.2 Interpretive Plan 58 13.3 Recommendations for the Interpretive Plan 49 13.4 UNESCO World Heritage Education Goals 62 14.0 VISITATION AND REGIONAL TOURISM 63 14.1 Visitation 63 14.2 Regional Tourism 63

LIST OF FIGURES Map Location of Serpent Mound in Ohio and in Adams County Following page 15 Putnam Sketch Map of Serpent Mound Park, 1890 Page 54

PHOTOGRAPHY CREDITS Jeff Wilson - Cover photograph, aerial view of Serpent Mound Gray & Pape, Inc. – all photographs not otherwise credited were taken by Gray & Pape staff, and Michael J. Matts, Matts Heritage Consulting, in preparing this plan

APPENDICES

Appendix A: List of Participants from 2-day Planning Retreat, November 21 and 22, 2014

Appendix B: Chart Note Summary from 2-day Planning Retreat

Appendix C: Tribal Representation at March 24, 2015 plan review in Oklahoma

Appendix D: Ohio Historic Inventory Forms

Appendix E: World Heritage Attributes

Appendix F: Legal Description of Serpent Mound Property Boundary

Appendix G: Management Agreement – Ohio History Connection/Arc of Appalachia

Appendix H: Pell Survey

Appendix I: Lidar-based Computer Visualizations and Contour Mapping of Ridge Views

Appendix J: Deed transferring site from Harvard College to Ohio State Archaeological & Historical Society

Appendix K: Serpent Mound Special Use Permit: Procedures and Policies

Appendix L: Ohio History Connection Archaeological Survey/Excavation Permit

Appendix M: Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-644)

Appendix N: Adams County Economic Development/ Tourism Study

Appendix O: Civil Works Administration approval for Serpent Mound improvements c. 1933

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

This plan has been created to guide decisions concerning the development, use, interpretation, study, and preservation of the ancient Serpent Mound geoglyph and related resources. It will provide the Ohio History Connection with the means to make informed decisions concerning its stewardship of the site, which is presently on the United States World Heritage Tentative List. The plan was prepared to address the complementary purposes of guiding the Ohio History Connection’s decision-making regarding capital improvements, management, and operation and meeting the World Heritage Committee’s standards for preserving those attributes which give the site its Outstanding Universal Value (see Section 4.0 and Appendix B, p. 29).

This management plan reflects the recommendations of Management Plans for World Heritage Sites: A Practical Guide (Ringbeck 2008) and also meets the management goals and objectives of the Ohio History Connection. As a non-profit organization that functions under Ohio law in a public/private sector partnership, the Ohio History Connection has a responsibility to Ohio citizens. Thus, the planning process has included substantial stakeholder input to inform this management plan.

A key partner in the development of this plan was the Arc of Appalachia Preserve System, which has been responsible for the day-to-day operations of the site under a management agreement entered into with Ohio History Connection in 2009. A steering Committee provided direction and conducted review of the plan; Members of the Steering Committee early in the planning process were George Kane, Karen Hassel, and Brad Lepper, Ohio History Connection; Nancy Stranahan and Tom Johnson, the Arc of Appalachia; Jeff Wilson and Jeff Cobb, the Friends of Serpent Mound; and Bret Ruby, Hopewell Culture National Historical Park. Later in the planning process, Tim Goodwin, Serpent Mound site manager with the Arc of Appalachia, and Jeff Huxmann of the Adams County Travel & Visitors Bureau, replaced Jeff Cobb and Tom Johnson.

The Ohio History Connection entered into a contract with the cultural resources consulting firm Gray & Pape, Inc. of Cincinnati to work with the Ohio History Connection and its partners to prepare the plan. Gray and Pape conducted one-on-one interviews with twenty-one individuals representing ten different local organizations and government entities, 27 stakeholders participated in a two-day planning retreat and those participants reviewed and commented on the draft plan, and the general public was invited to a public open house where the plan was presented for comment. Opportunities were provided to participants in the two-day planning retreat and to the general public to review and comment on the plan online through the Ohio History Connection’s website.

Serpent Mound of Tomorrow small-group work session at a two-day planning retreat, November 21 and 22, 2014.

Importantly, the Connection is engaged in on-going outreach to American Indian tribes with ancestral lands in Ohio. These outreach efforts have encompassed all of the programmatic endeavors of the Ohio History Connection, including Serpent Mound and this plan.

The Ohio History Connection, founded as the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society in 1885 “to promote a knowledge of archaeology and history, especially in Ohio” as a private non-profit organization. Today, it operates under Section 149.30 of the Ohio Revised Code to provide a wide variety of history services for the citizens of Ohio through a public/private partnership with the State of Ohio. In addition to operating a system of historic sites and museums, it operates the state historic preservation program, the state archives, a library and the state museum; publishes historical material; provides assistance to local historical groups; and collects and maintains historical, archaeological, and natural history collections.

Serpent Mound is internationally recognized as the largest and best preserved pre- contact effigy in the world. Serpent Mound is known throughout the world in many circles of life. Novelist and poet Marge Piercy included Serpent Mound in a series of poems about nature, LA SACRE DU PRINTEMPS, published by The Massachusetts Review, Vol. 2, Summer 1987:

Seven great sensuous coils project themselves forward across the plateau in motion caught—not frozen—as if poised.

Toward the tail, the snake curls itself round and round seven times to the tiny center of an exclamation point

like a cat turning and turning in place till she lies down to sleep, a ritual whose significance cause her to smile.

The head is open and striking. Violence as dance, dance as sculpture. Spiral coiling as a vine climbs a tree.

Does the serpent bite the sun? Does she sink her teeth into the moon? Is it her egg she carries in her mouth?

She invokes a dance too long awaited, for she is as fearsome as she is playful, and the tail still sleeps while the head strikes.

In addition to the monumental and often referenced serpent earthwork, the site includes three small burial mounds, archaeological remains of ancient villages, landscape features that likely were significant to the builders of Serpent Mound, as well as several historic buildings and a re-constructed picnic shelter.

The World Heritage List is a program that arose out of the 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (commonly known as the World Heritage Convention). A World Heritage Committee operates the program within the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Serpent Mound was added to the United States' Tentative List in 2008 by the United States Department of the Interior. As of the final preparation of this plan, no date had been set for submitting the nomination to the World Heritage Committee. The United States National Park Service, which operates the program in this country, advised the Ohio History Connection

in January, 2015 that Serpent Mound will need to be submitted to the World Heritage Committee with other examples of this type of earthwork.

Gray & Pape, Inc. in association with Meisner Land Vision assisted the Ohio History Connection with the planning process, conducted research and public outreach, performed site analysis, and prepared the plan. ChangeWorks of the Heartland assisted with the planning, conducting, and reporting of the two-day planning retreat.

1.2 HOW TO USE THIS PLAN

This plan is primarily a document that will be used by staff of the Ohio History Connection and the local management group, the Arc of Appalachia, for making long- term decisions and plans for the benefit of the site and to guide its day-to-day operation.

It also is a public statement that informs those interested in the site of the Connection’s plans and aspirations for the site. It is intended to be a dynamic document that will be revisited as work is accomplished and/or conditions change.

It is intended that action steps in the plan are to be continually informed by changes in existing conditions, information in historic documents, findings from future research, and by the vision, mission, and guiding principles stated in the plan.

The plan is divided in 14 sections: Introduction; Summary of Priorities; Property Description; Outstanding Universal Value of Serpent Mound; Chronologic History of Serpent Mound; Management System; Basic Principles for Planning and Action; Protection of Outstanding Universal Value; Buffer Zones; Monitoring and Quality Control; Research; Visitor Use of the Site; Interpretation and Education; Visitation and Regional Tourism. Throughout the plan there are photographs and other material to further inform the user and the appendices includes a bibliography, maps, and additional supporting material.

1.3 METHODOLOGY

Guidance in preparing this plan was derived from the professional experience of numerous contributors, and by several relevant publications to include, but not limited to: The Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historical Properties and the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, National Park Service, US Department of the Interior, and The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation; the Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports: Content, Process, and Techniques, National Park Service; Timothy Darvill’s article in World Archaeology,

`Research frameworks for World Heritage Sites and the conceptualization of archaeological knowledge’; and Management Plans for World Heritage Sites: A Practical Guide, UNESCO. The Historic Site Management Plan for Newark Earthworks (another Ohio History Connection historic site) which was completed in 2003, also served as a model.

On-site Analysis of Existing Conditions On August 2, 2012 a multi-disciplinary group of skilled professionals from Gray & Pape and Meisner Land Vision conducted an on-site analysis of existing conditions at Serpent Mound. Experience and skill sets in the group encompassed archaeology, architectural history, history, preservation planning, master planning, site design, landscape architecture, cultural landscapes, heritage tourism, and interpretation.

Karen Hassel, Regional Coordinator for Historic Sites for the Ohio History Connection, engaged with the team on-site. Documents and maps were reviewed, and research conducted in advance of the site visit, photographs were taken of existing conditions, discussions were held amongst the team, and a written summary of observations, issues, and related background material was assembled and provided to the Connection and the Steering Committee. Site Photograph, August 2012 – damaged tree in the distance, middle of the photograph, it is now removed.

1.4 Public Input Results of the following public outreach efforts identified below served to inform the Connection, the Steering Committee, and the consultant team in the development and preparation of this plan.

Planning Charrette Agenda was prepared in consultation with the Steering Committee, and conducted with the Steering Committee members on September 29, 2012 at the Louden One Room School in Bratton Township, Adams County, Ohio. A written summary was prepared, as well as a complete set of notes, and a document was distributed to the Steering Committee that captured key findings and recommendations from the charrette.

Stakeholder Interviews One-on-one stakeholder interviews were conducted, during February and March of 2013, with twenty-one individuals representing ten different local organizations or government entities. The interviews were performed throughout Adams County, Ohio at the respective offices of the interviewees, and in one instance by telephone. Interview questions were developed, reviewed, and revised in consultation with the Steering Committee, as was the interviewee contact list. Written reports capturing the interviewee responses and a summation of overarching observations gleaned from the interviews were provided to the Connection and the Steering Committee.

Two-day Planning Retreat & Review and Comment On November 21 and 22, 2014 the Ohio History Connection convened a meeting of invited stakeholders and experts who are committed to the future of Serpent Mound. The primary purpose of the retreat was to gain their insights and input regarding the future of the site for the development of this Historic Site Management Plan. The meeting was also an opportunity to build ongoing relationships and support for the site and the plan now and in the future.

Twenty seven individuals participated in the retreat representing county and township government, the Ohio History Connection, the Arc of Appalachia, the National Park Service, a representative of the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma, the Friends of Serpent Mound, Ohio earthworks sites, members of the professional archaeology community and other professionals with relevant skills and expertise, local residents, and others. A complete list of the participants with their affiliation and a flip-chart summary from the retreat is included as Appendix A. The results of large group sessions and small group break-out activities were recorded on charts during the retreat, and a complete report of the retreat was prepared by the lead facilitation consultant, Chris Kloth, ChangeWorks of the Heartland.

Retreat participants were given the opportunity to review and comment on the draft plan March 6 through 15, 2015. An important purpose of that review was to ensure that committee priorities and recommendations coming out of the retreat were effectively identified and addressed in the plan.

Large-group work session conducted during the two-day planning retreat, November 21 and 22, 2014

Outreach to American Indians Serpent Mound and other ancient sites in Ohio cannot be directly linked to modern federally recognized American Indian tribes and there are no federally recognized tribes in Ohio today. However, the tribes with historical roots in Ohio have been working in recent years to rediscover their ancestral homeland here. Taking advantage of their interest, the Ohio History Connection has worked to build relationships with the former Ohio tribes. The Connection’s motivations to foster those relationships extend well beyond this management plan; having American Indian perspectives is important in almost all of its endeavors. As a result, there has been repeated travel to Oklahoma by Ohio History Connection staff and the Ohio History Connection has hosted many tribal members as they visit Ohio. There also have been joint projects and OHC projects that have benefited from the participation of tribal members. This has led to a much greater understanding of these former Ohio residents and their history after being forced to leave Ohio. The tribes have welcomed the opportunity to help the Connection to understand their past and to use the opportunity to strengthen their connections to their ancestral land. This has resulted in an awakening of tribal interest and spiritual and cultural connection to the Serpent Mound effigy and the site.

Specifically related to this project, on June 24, 2014, George Kane, Karen Hassel, Brad Lepper and Erin Bartlett met in Oklahoma with many of these tribes to talk about tribal participation and input for Ohio History Connection’s historic sites. The tribes represented at the meeting were the Eastern Shawnee of Oklahoma, Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma, Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma, and Wyandotte Nation. The Miami Tribe of Oklahoma and the Delaware Tribe of Oklahoma attempted to call in to the meeting, but technology problems prevented their participation. Connection staff shared a PowerPoint presentation and provided overviews of the three Ohio History Connection sites on the World Heritage Tentative List. Each overview addressed the history of the site, facilities, management and other successes or challenges associated with the site. The tribal representatives voiced their language and management concerns, and the group discussed how to move forward and work together to include each other’s perspectives. On March 24, 2015, George Kane, Karen Hassel, Brad Lepper, Nancy Stranahan, and Michael Matts traveled to Oklahoma and presented this plan to tribal representatives. The primary objective was to hear from the tribes regarding treatment of the serpent effigy, burial mounds, and habitation sites, and with regard to interpretation and visitor use.

Tribes represented at the half-day plan review were the Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma, Seneca/Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, Wyandotte Nation, Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma and the Shawnee Tribe. Tribes invited that could not attend were the

Absentee Shawnee of Oklahoma, Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma, Delaware Tribe of Oklahoma, and Miami Tribe of Oklahoma. (Attendees are listed in Appendix B).

Chief Billy Friend of the Wyandotte Nation and Nancy Stranahan, Director of the Arc of Appalachia, discuss tribal shield symbolism during a break in management plan review meetings with the Oklahoma tribes, March 24, 2015.

Involving the General Public In addition to all the above input and review cited, the Ohio History Connection’s communications staff implemented a communications plan designed to promote awareness of the draft plan’s availability for comment through the Connection’s website. The plan was made available to the general public for review and comment from April 3 to April 26, 2015.

A key element of the communications plan was the promotion of a public open house that was conducted in the evening of April 21, 2015. Over 35 members of the general public participated in the open house held at the Peebles High School, Peebles, Ohio, wherein they heard a brief summary presentation by George Kane and participants were then able to circulate among four individual stations to review and discuss the plan, and provide their comments. The four station topics were Serpent Mound Tomorrow, Research, Preservation, and Interpretation. Participant comments were recorded in writing at each station. By all accounts, the public was very satisfied with the open house format and grateful for the opportunity to engage at the stations in small group discussion with professional expertise from the Ohio History Connection, the Arc of Appalachia, and the management plan consultant.

A discussion at the Preservation station at the Serpent Mound Open House, Peebles High School, Peebles, Ohio, April 21, 2015.

2.0 SUMMARY OF PRIORITIES

This summary of key action items reflects priorities at the time the plan was prepared and adopted. It is not a complete summary of every action identified throughout the plan. In some cases, action items to achieve plan goals occur in every stage from short-term to long-term.

Over time, new research information, unforeseen opportunities, or unsuspected increases or decreases in human and fiscal resource capacity may result in pragmatic adjustments to these priorities. More detail regarding the rationale and the action step is provided in the body of the plan.

2.1 SHORT-TERM ACTION ITEMS

Exterior Exhibits  Design and install exhibits on the grounds that give visitors a comprehensive overview of the site and its significance. (p. 61)

Replace Museum Exhibits  Replace the existing exhibits in the museum to up-to-date and correct deficiencies in the interpretation. (p. 61)

Improve Off-Hours Security  Rehabilitate the caretaker’s residence to house personnel to provide site security. (p. 45)

Determine Stability of the Bluff and Ridge  Hire consultants to conduct a geologic and hydrogeologic study of the bluff and the ridge to assess stability concerns identified in the planning process. (p. 44)

Create an Interpretive Plan  Create an interpretive plan to guide the interpretation of the site. (p.60)

Create Baseline Inventory of the Archaeological Record  Assemble existing research results from various investigations that are not presently compiled. (p. 53)  Prepare a composite map that overlays Frederick Ward Putnam’s 1887 map onto a modern survey or aerial view and incorporate locations of known archaeological resources and past archaeological work. (p. 53)

10 Conduct Remote Sensing Survey of the Bluff  Use geophysics to determine and map the exact locations of past excavations and to identify other below grade features. (p.53)

Create a Master Plan  Incorporating and building upon this management plan, develop a master plan to guide development to ensure that the goals and priorities established in the management plan will be implemented in such a way as to not impact the cultural resources which give the site its Outstanding Universal Value. (pp. 34, 40, 56)

Consult with American Indian Tribes  Actively consult with federally recognized American Indian tribes to seek their involvement, views, and input. (p. 24)

Establish an Advisory Council  An advisory council will engage and advise on the development and operation of the site and advance public understanding and knowledge of Serpent Mound. (p. 27)

Negotiate Revised Agreement with Harvard University  Renegotiate the terms of the gift of the property from Harvard College in 1900 with Harvard University to permit the charging of admission fees. (p. 46)

2.2 MID-RANGE ACTION ITEMS

Remove or Relocate Intrusions  Remove the steps in the tail of the serpent mound effigy and restore the area, as understood by pre-CCC era documents. (p. 44)  Work to dedicate Serpent Mound as an archaeological preserve. (p. 33)  Remove invasive species (p. 42)  Trim branches or remove trees that restrict views of the effigy mound. (p. 42)

Facilitate Future Research  Design and conduct research to prepare a baseline Inventory of natural resources with a focus on the paleo-environment. (p. 53)  Form a research review committee that includes outside experts. (p. 53)

Easements  Secure agricultural easements on agricultural lands in the valley and conservations easements on forested land surrounding the site. (p. 38)

2.3 LONG-TERM ACTION ITEMS

Create Buffer Zones and Protect View Perspectives  Contingent on the willingness of interested landowners, expand the size of the protected property around Serpent Mound in order to buffer the site, accommodate increased visitation, and locate new visitor facilities farther away from the serpent effigy and other known cultural features. (pp. 37, 40, 38, 58)

Design and Build New Museum/Visitor Center Facility  New facilities are to be designed and built to meet goals identified in this plan. Facilities will be located according to a new master plan on property to be acquired, away from the resources which are of Outstanding Universal Value. (pp. 40, 56)

Remove Remaining Intrusions  After appropriate evaluation, consider the removal and/or relocation of the picnic shelter, observation tower and other remaining intrusions identified in the plan. (pp. 40, 47)

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

3.1 SERPENT MOUND Serpent Mound, the property owned today by the Ohio History Connection, encompasses the monumental Serpent Mound as well as other mounds, archaeological remains, and landscape features that likely were determinative in the ancient builders' selection of this location as the site for the construction of Serpent Mound. This serpent effigy is the largest documented surviving example of an ancient effigy mound in the world. It is a sinuous earthen embankment that if straightened out would measure approximately 1,420 feet long, and includes a 120 by 60 foot oval embankment at the northwest end. The oval has been interpreted variously as the serpent's eye, part of its head, or a secondary object, such as an egg, grasped in the serpent's open jaws. The effigy ranges from 4 to 5 feet in height and from 20 to 25 feet in width.

Serpent Mound is situated on a ridge above Ohio Brush Creek. The area is a part of a geologically ancient meteoric impact crater. Natural rock formations at the end of this finger-like ridge are suggestive of a snake's head, which may have helped provide the inspiration to build the serpent effigy along the top of this ridge.

The Serpent Mound, the burial mounds, and the archaeological remains were cited in the statement of significance when the National Historic Landmark was documented in 1976.

3.2 OTHER CULTURAL RESOURCES

The depression era buildings and structures and the 1908 observation tower located at the site do not contribute to the Outstanding Universal Value of the site.

Ohio Historic Inventory forms were completed for all of the buildings and the tower in 2012. These buildings and the observation tower have achieved some significance in their own right. However, the level of significance most likely will not meet National Historic Landmark criteria, although they are likely to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. (Appendix D)

One of the restroom facilities constructed by the Works Progress Administration.

The observation tower dates to the early years of the Ohio History Connection’s ownership and management of the site. It was designed and manufactured by the Columbus Wire and Iron Works specifically for the Serpent Mound site. The tower has served numerous generations of sightseers, making it one of the more beloved features of the site. Aside from the replacement of the wooden stair treads and deck planks during basic maintenance, this structure appears much as it did when erected.

Structures and facilities built the Works Progress Administration during the depression era include the barn, museum and concessions building, the overlook, the two comfort stations, the caretaker’s house, and the garage. All seven of these resources exhibit characteristics common to depression era park construction projects, making them excellent examples of the type. Aside from a few minor alterations to the museum and concessions building, the caretaker’s house, and the comfort stations (installation of plumbing), the buildings at Serpent Mound provide an excellent example of Works Progress Administration work.

The only structure at the site that does not retain its original integrity is the picnic shelter. The original shelter dated to ca. 1930, but the only vestiges from that time period are the low, stone wall that skirts the perimeter of the picnic shelter and the original stone floor. The existing posts, beams, and roof were constructed in 2006. Consequently, the picnic shelter no longer retains its historic integrity.

Toward the southwestern corner of the property two early trails skirt the upper rim of the bluff above Ohio Brush Creek. The pathways likely date to the Ohio History Connection’s early years of management and depression era construction. Now overgrown and highly eroded, these stone-lined pathways appear to have provided pedestrian access to the mound itself, as well as to the rock ledge below the serpent’s head. A portion of the trail is lined by a series of mature cedar trees, spaced at ten- foot intervals. Sightseers entering the site over these footpaths would

The mature cedar trees along a former trail at Serpent Mound

14 have experienced the approach to the mound in an entirely different way than it is approached now. In addition, there is a granite memorial, a bronze historic marker, a ticket booth located at the parking lot entrance, and various signage throughout the site, which is being replaced.

3.3 Site Location Serpent Mound is located in the Township of Bratton, County of Adams, State of Ohio. Although the 1900 deed from Harvard College states that the property contained 60.75 acres, a 1994 survey determined that the site is actually 54.141 acres (Ty R. Pell, Registered Land Surveyor No. 7524, February 1994). The center point for the geographic coordinates is: N 39º 1' 27" W 83º 25' 47". The Pell survey (Appendix H) including the legal description is attached as Appendix J.

1 3960 - 12 t c e j o r P

P & G r fo

1 . 3 9.

S I cG r A n i

d Location of Project in te a Adams County, Ohio e r C

") Overlook Observation Tower

Barn Museum

Picnic Shelter

Restrooms Overlook Caretaker's House Maintenance Building

Barn d x Observation Tower m _01. c nLo e G _ d Location of Serpent Mound on USGS 7.5' Quadrangle Museum pM

r Sinking Spring, Ohio (1961, PR 1974, PI 1988) e

S Picnic Shelter 500 0 500 Meters _ 1 3960

_ 1500 0 1500 Feet 12 \ Women's Room s t c e j LEGEND o r

P Men's Room Serpent Mound Site 0_ 0 \ S I Subject Building Locations

G Caretaker's Building ng_

i Mounds and Earthworks k Maintenance Building r o

W Ring Graben of Impact Crater \ 1 0 396 - 12 \ 2 Location of Serpent Mound Site 201

\ Location of Serpent Mound Site on OSIP I y l r Aerial Imagery, Flown March/April 2008 and its Primary Structures, ea Y _

s 100 0 100 Meters t Bratton Township, Adams County, Ohio c e j o r

P 300 0 300 Feet _

0 GRAY PAPE, INC.

0 & ARCHAEOLOGY - HISTORY - HISTORIC PRESERVATION Figure 1 \ M:

2 201

, 1 3 y l u J 4.0 OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE OF SERPENT MOUND

Serpent Mound has outstanding universal value as a monumental geoglyph embodying fundamental cosmological principles of an indigenous ancient American Indian culture.

Serpent Mound represents the acme of ancient effigy mound-building in North America. It has become an icon of indigenous cultural achievements in this region, principally because of its enormous scale and its remarkably naturalistic quality that makes it immediately recognizable as a representation of a serpent. Whatever else it may have represented to its ancient builders, modern observers readily can identify it as a snake.

The serpent as a biomorphic geoglyph is widespread in the Americas and as a feature of the iconography of Mississippian/Late Prehistoric/Historic American Indian art and cosmology the Great Serpent is a well-known spiritual being.

The physical environmental setting of Serpent Mound preserves much of the ambience of its aboriginal setting and, moreover, preserves the underlying bedrock outcrop that may have suggested the immanent presence of the serpent spirit to the builders of the effigy.

The depiction of the Serpent in the form of a massive, naturalistic geoglyph designed to mark the passage of the seasons, epitomizes the attempts of the indigenous people of the Ohio Valley to integrate their lives with the cosmos in much the same way as peoples in places as distant as the World Heritage sites of Cahokia Mounds, Chaco Canyon, and even Stonehenge.

Included in Appendix E is the justification that was prepared in 2007 to nominate Serpent Mound to the World Heritage Tentative List. It will be revised for submission for designation as a World Heritage Site at a date to be determined.

Partial view of the Serpent Effigy (geoglyph) taken from the observation tower, view towards the head of the effigy.

5.0 CHRONOLOGIC HISTORY OF SERPENT MOUND

5.1 IMPORTANT DATES

250,000,000 – 330,000,000 BC – Cryptoexplosion impact crater created 800 BC – AD 100 – Burial mounds and occupation attributable to Adena culture. Possible construction of effigy mound. 1000-1650 – Burial mound and occupation attributable to Fort Ancient culture. 1120 – Probable construction of effigy mound 1795 – Treaty of Greeneville forces American Indian tribes to give up their lands in southern Ohio 1830-1843 – Indian Removal Act in 1830 leading to removal of last Ohio tribe in 1843 1846 – Squier & Davis survey Serpent Mound 1859 – Tornado passes over Serpent Mound removing trees 1883 – Frederic Ward Putnam from the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard College first visits the site 1885 – Ohio State Archaeological & Historical Society (now Ohio History Connection) formed 1887 – Site acquired by the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology 1887-91 – Putnam conducts extensive archaeological investigation of the site and restores Serpent Mound and three burial mounds 1897 – Trustees of the Peabody Museum transfer Serpent Mound to Harvard College 1900 – Site deeded to the Ohio State Archaeological & Historical Society 1908 – Observation tower constructed at the site 1930s – Construction of museum, restrooms, other facilities. Additional restoration of Serpent Mound. 1964 – Site designated a National Historic Landmark 1990 & 1992 – Excavations for waterline reveal Fort Ancient artifacts and features 1991 – Limited re-excavation of Putnam trench for radiocarbon samples 2008 – Serpent Mound placed on United States World Heritage Tentative List 2009 – Management agreement with the Arc of Appalachia 2010-2011 – Coring of geoglyph to obtain samples for radiocarbon dating 2011-2012 – Restroom improvements and associated archaeological investigation 2012 – Ohio Historic Inventory forms completed for Depression Era buildings and features and for the tower

5.2 CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT HISTORY

Archaeological evidence, to date, indicates that the landscape encompassing Serpent Mound was inhabited for more than 13,000 years. As many as 345 million years ago there was a cryptoexplosion in the area, which is currently thought to be an impact site

(Ohio Geological Survey, Department of Natural Resources). Serpent Mound is located on the southwestern edge of the outer circle of the impact crater which is about four miles in diameter. For possibly millions of years the landscape and the resultant landforms from the cryptoexplosion have been modified by natural forces.

This National Natural Landmark is identified as the Serpent Mound Cryptoexplosion, which may inadvertently cause the public to make more direct association than is warranted between the impact crater and the building of the geoglyph. The name represents two occurrences that were probably hundreds of millions of years apart, one created by an astrophysical event, and the other constructed by humans with limited tools.

The serpent effigy is a striking reflection of the indigenous belief system of its Native American builders, probably of the Fort Ancient culture, which flourished in this region during the Mississippian/Late Prehistoric period, circa 1000-1650 AD. However, at the present time there is no definitive time period of construction, but rather various estimated time periods of construction and theories regarding cultural affiliation.

For many years, it was thought that the Serpent Mound was constructed by the earlier Adena culture; certainly the Adena culture identified this area as culturally significant given the presence of Adena burial mounds. However, the best evidence to date indicates that the Serpent Mound was built by the Fort Ancient culture (Fletcher et al. 1996; Lepper and Frokling 2003). These people used monumental serpent effigies constructed of stone as well as “woodhenges” to serve as solar calendars that structured the year for the planting and harvesting of domesticated crops, principally maize, and for the various ceremonies that accompanied the key dates in the seasonal cycle (Lepper 2005).

Other evidence suggests that Serpent Mound is an Adena effigy after all, since radiocarbon dates published in 2014 were in that age range (Herrmann, et al. 2014). The authors of that report suggest the effigy was originally built by the Adena and later refurbished by the Fort Ancient culture. As stated earlier, these dates, however, are not definitive. Moreover, all other effigy mounds in eastern North America, including Ohio's only other effigy mound, Alligator Mound, have been dated to the Late Woodland-Late Prehistoric (or Mississippian) period. Further research is needed to definitively establish the age of Serpent Mound.

Evidence of ancient occupation of the site includes three American Indian burial mounds, as well as evidence of contemporary habitation sites of the builders of both the Serpent effigy and the burial mounds. One of the burial mounds is an elliptical mound,

attributable to the Fort Ancient culture, circa 1000-1650 AD, and the other two burial mounds are conical mounds attributable to the earlier Adena culture, circa 800 BC – 100 AD. The habitation remains include a Fort Ancient village overlying a smaller Adena occupation.

Archaeological investigations also found later burials in the upper layers of a large Adena conical burial mound, which are likely date to the late Late Woodland period, circa 500-900 AD. In addition artifacts attributable to Paleoindian and Archaic cultures, circa 12,000-800 BC, have been recovered at the site.. Collections at the Harvard Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology and at the Ohio History Connection contain artifacts from the Serpent Mound site from nearly every Ohio pre-contact period.

5.3 HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY

Southwestern Ohio where Serpent Mound is located encompasses historical ancestral lands of the Shawnee and several other tribes. Starting with the Treaty of Greeneville in 1895, during the late 18th and early 19th centuries treaties between the tribes and the federal government resulted in substantial changes to ownership of tribal lands in Ohio. In May of 1830, the U.S. Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, which brought about subsequent treaties in 1831 and 1832 with remaining Ohio tribes. These treaties resulted in the forced removal of the remaining tribes. By the end of 1843 there were no Indian tribes remaining in Ohio, ending centuries of stewardship of Serpent Mound and other ancient earthworks in Ohio by the descendants of their builders.

Serpent Mound was surveyed in 1846 by Ephraim G. Squier, editor of nearby Chillicothe’s Scioto Gazette, and Dr. Edwin Davis, a Chillicothe physician. Their work was first documented in Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, the first publication of the Smithsonian Institution. They reported that a “circular elevation of large stones much burned” once had existed within the oval enclosure, but it had “been thrown down and scattered” (Squier & Davis 1848:97).

A disastrous tornado went through the area in 1859, taking down all but a few of the trees covering the geoglyph. After the tornado, the landowner, J. Lovett, cleared and cultivated the site for a few years, including the Serpent Mound itself. Later, the mound and surrounding area was used for livestock grazing.

Serpent Effigy in the foreground, photograph by John Kimball, a member of Putnam party, 1883. (Courtesy of the Peabody Museum)

American anthropologist Frederic Ward Putnam, traveling with a small group by mule-drawn wagon, first visited and photographed the site in 1883. Putnam was the Curator of Harvard University’s Peabody Museum from 1875-1909, and Harvard’s Peabody Professor of American Archaeology and Ethnology, 1886-1909.

It had been 37-years since Squier & Davis surveyed the site. Photographs taken by John Kimball, a member of Putnam’s party indicated that the effigy had been reduced from a height of 4-5 feet (1.2-1.5 meters) recorded by Squier & Davis to 2-3 feet (0.6-.09 meters), but the outline of the serpent was intact and clearly visible. When Putnam arrived at the site again in 1885, he became very concerned about the continued deterioration of the mound caused by erosion, people now visiting the site, and excavations.

In response, Putnam initiated an effort to purchase the site. In 1887 the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard College acquired the site through the generosity of private Boston donors, which was the result of a fundraising effort led substantially by women, including his colleague, ethnologist Alice Cunningham Fletcher. This purchase represents a very early historic preservation effort by the private sector and a non-profit entity to save a special place. It may be the first such preservation effort for an archaeological site in the country.

From 1887 to 1889, Putnam conducted systematic investigations of portions of the effigy, the adjacent burial mounds, and parts of the surrounding landscape (Putnam 1890). After concluding his research, he carefully restored the mounds. The Peabody Museum converted the property into a public park and operated it as a park. In 1877, the property was transferred to Harvard College who then deeded it to the then Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society in 1900. (See Putnam’s 1890 sketch map of Serpent Mound Park on page 54)

A view of the 1908 Observation Tower, photograph taken during initial plan site evaluation in 2012. A metal observation tower, which remains on the site today, was constructed in 1908. During the 1930s, the Works Progress Administration (WPA), one of several federal Depression Era programs, built a museum, restrooms, service buildings, and the

overlook that are extant today. The picnic shelter that was built at that time was later removed due to deterioration of the roof structure and supports, leaving only the low stone walls and floor. A new shelter was constructed in 2006 incorporating those surviving features.

Between 1990 and 1992, the Ohio History Connection conducted a series of excavations along the route of a proposed waterline. This projected line extended near the small conical burial mound located south of the effigy mound and across the area identified by Putnam as the village site. A number of features were uncovered most of which yielded ceramics and flint tools assignable to the Fort Ancient culture. These results also indicated that a great deal of the subsurface archaeology at the site remained intact beneath a shallow layer of cultivated soil.

In 1991, avocational archaeologists Robert Fletcher and Terry Cameron, directed by Ohio History Connection archaeologist Bradley Lepper and assisted by professional archaeologists Dee Anne Wymer and William Pickard, undertook a limited excavation of one of Putnam's old trenches in order to obtain charcoal samples to use in radiocarbon dating (Fletcher et al. 1992). This investigation resulted in radiocarbon dates that suggest the effigy mound was built between 990 and 850 years BP (cal 995 to 1265 CE).

In 2008, Serpent Mound was added to the United State World Heritage Tentative List. In 2009 the Ohio History Connection entered into a management agreement with the Arc of Appalachia Preserve System for the day-to-day operation of the site, retaining responsibility for the preservation of the cultural and natural resources as well as capital improvements and major maintenance. (Appendix E)

In 2011-2012, a team of archaeologists led by William Romain, William Monaghan, and Edward Herrmann conducted a series of investigations at Serpent Mound, including the retrieval of soil cores from which they obtained organic sediment for radiocarbon dating. The samples produced dates ranging from 2530 – 2170 years BP (cal 639-303 BCE).

Also in 2011-2012, the historic men’s and women’s restrooms in the circa 1930s stone structures were upgraded from pit latrines to modern flush toilets. Prior to excavation for the septic system, archaeological investigations were conducted that found artifacts from Early Woodland, Late Prehistoric (Fort Ancient), and the historic era.

Ohio Historic Inventory Forms were completed in 2012 for the barn, picnic shelter, men’s and women’s restroom, museum, tower, overlook, caretaker’s house, and maintenance building (Appendix D).

5.4 SERPENTS AND AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURE Serpents have been documented as elements of contemporary Shawnee belief systems in Shawnee!: The Ceremonialism of a Native American Tribe and its Cultural Background (176-178, Howard 1981). Indians of the Midwest, a website and publication of the Newberry Library, states under an aerial photograph of the mound, “The sculpture probably represented the Horned Serpent . . .” In George Lankford’s study published in 2007, The Great Serpent in Eastern North America, he states, “the Great Serpent was a universally known figure in the Eastern Woodlands for many centuries . . . the Great Serpent appears not only in myth, but also in graphic designs, both ancient and historic."

Dialogue with American Indian tribes during the preparation of this plan confirmed the importance of serpents/snakes (both terms used) in the cultural history of tribes once living in Ohio and the Midwest. Those contemporary American Indians did not claim to understand the meaning of Serpent Mound to its builders, but rather, they believe that serpents/snakes have played a significant role in their tribes’ cultures. Thus, in turn, they respect that the meaning of the serpent was held special, indeed sacred, to its builders and subsequent generations of American Indians.

6.0 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

6.1 MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

The Ohio History Connection has owned and managed Serpent Mound since 1900.

It is a 501(c)3 corporation and by Ohio Revised Code Section 149.30 is the State of Ohio’s partner in preserving and interpreting Ohio’s history, archaeology, and natural history.

The Connection exists to collect and make available evidence of the past, and to provide leadership on furthering knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of the prehistory and history of Ohio and of the broader cultural and natural environments of which Ohio is a part.

The Ohio History Connection’s mission is to “spark discovery of Ohio history!” and “connect people with Ohio’s rich past to understand the present and create a better future.” In collaboration with local community groups, the Connection manages the operations of 57 historic, archaeological, and natural sites and museums, and is one of the largest statewide site systems in the country.

In 2008, the Ohio History Connection embarked on a plan to transition day-to-day operations of most of its historic sites and museums to local organizations. Under these agreements, the organizations manage staffing, programs, grounds keeping, and retail operations and the Ohio History Connection manages the cultural and natural resources, collections, and exhibits and is responsible for major maintenance and capital improvements. The Ohio History Connection typically provides an annual stipend to the local management groups and the local groups retain earned income to support operation of the sites. This local partnership program has been hugely successful and has proven to be a model for other state and regional history organizations with historic sites.

Through a formal management agreement with the Ohio History Connection (Appendix G), the Arc of Appalachia has served as the on-site manager for Serpent Mound since 2009 as well as for Fort Hill Earthworks and Nature Preserve, which is also an Ohio History Connection archaeological site and is located nearby.

The Arc of Appalachia is a non-profit organization established in 1995. Its mission is to protect the rich diversity of life within North America’s Great Eastern Forest by acquiring and stewarding wildlands in the Ohio region, creating sanctuaries where people can connect with the natural world, teaching about the East’s forest heritage to inspire a global conservation ethic, and honoring American Indian legacies in its work and teachings. Currently, the Arc has 17 project regions in southern Ohio, representing over 5,000 acres of natural landscapes. Five of the 17 sites managed by the Arc protect major Native American earthworks. Public services include three visitors centers, a large number of education courses on natural history and other topics, a residential education complex, and over 32 miles of hiking trails.

6.2 STRATEGIES FOR MANAGEMENT

Ohio History Connection/Arc of Appalachia Current management of the site by the Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia Preserve System is an effective, cost-efficient, and successful partnership. It is fully anticipated that this management agreement will continue into the future. Moreover, representatives of these two organizations will work together to develop a master plan, priorities, and budgets to advance the goals and objectives of the management plan.

American Indians Recognizing and honoring the American Indian connections to Serpent Mound, both in the past and today, is fundamental to the site’s management. The Ohio History Connection is actively working with the federally recognized tribes which were removed from Ohio in the early 19th century who are increasingly involved in rediscovering their connections to ancient Ohio.

Action Items ● The Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia will regularly and actively consult with federally recognized American Indian tribes whose homelands

included Ohio, seeking their involvement, views and input. At a minimum, tribes will be consulted when replacing or changing exhibits, undergoing archaeological and other major ground disturbing work, and modifying or updating this plan. Interpretation of the site will include the perspectives, beliefs, and voices of American Indians.

Serpent Mound Advisory Council The Ohio History Connection will establish an advisory council to advise the Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia on development and operation of the site and to advance an increased public understanding and knowledge of Serpent Mound. Membership will include individuals who are representative of both the local community and region. Membership also will include individuals who are interested and actively involved in preserving and interpreting aspects of the state's heritage that are preserved and interpreted at the site. The advisory council will consist of members drawn from government, community institutions, business, site volunteers, educational and academic institutions, archaeological organizations, American Indians, and citizens interested in the well-being of the site.

Throughout the year, the advisory council will be consulted via meetings or through various other methods of communication to assist the Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia by working to: - further the mission and vision of the site, - provide input in the planning for projects, facilities and other development, research, and access at the site, and - advocate for the site.

Partnerships The Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia will work to expand and develop new partnerships with other institutions and stakeholders. These associations will allow the Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia and their partners to accomplish mutual goals. Strategic partnerships give each partner access to a broader range of resources and expertise in order Adams County Commmissioner Paul Worley presenting a summary of the Serpent Mound of Tomorrow committee discussions to the large to achieve desired outcomes group during the two-day planning retreat, Novermber 21 and 22, 2014. regarding the protection, promotion, research and educational components of the plan.

Potential partners include, but are not limited to, in alphabetical order: ● Adams County Commissioners ● Adams County Chamber of Commerce ● Adams County Community & Economic Development ● Adams County Genealogical Society ● Adams County Historical Society ● Adams County Travel & Visitors Bureau ● Archaeological Society of Ohio ● Ancient Ohio Trail ● Bratton Township Trustees ● Dayton Society of Natural History - Sunwatch Village and Fort Ancient Earthworks and Nature Preserve ● Farmland Preservation Program, Ohio Department of Agriculture ● Federally-recognized American Indian tribes with Ohio ancestral homelands ● Friends of Serpent Mound ● Friends of the Ancient Ohio Earthworks ● Heartland Earthworks Conservancy ● Highland County Convention & Visitors Bureau ● Hopewell Culture National Historical Park ● Hotels, motels, restaurants and related associations ● Local churches and school districts ● Ohio State University’s Newark Earthworks Center ● Ohio Archaeological Council ● Ohio Department of Transportation, District 9 ● Ohio State Senator District 14 ● Ohio State Representative District 90 ● Ohio State University Adams County Extension Office ● Peebles Area Business Association ● The Archaeology Conservancy ● The Nature Conservancy ● University of Cincinnati, Center for Electronic Reconstruction of Historic and Archaeological Sites ● U.S. Representative to Congress, 2nd District ● U.S. Senators representing Ohio ● Village of Peebles ● World Heritage Ohio Committee

7.0 BASIC PRINCIPLES for PLANNING and ACTION

Vision Statement Serpent Mound is a world-class historical site that instills pride in American Indians, in area residents, in people throughout the State of Ohio, and throughout the world. Its story is told with authenticity, presented with dignity, and elicits an emotional connection from the visitor. Its facilities and programs generate substantial visitation and drive economic development through heritage tourism. Collaboration is instrumental to achieve and sustain success throughout the development, maintenance, and operations of the site.

The Mission (Purpose) of the Serpent Mound site is to:

● preserve the geoglyph and associated cultural resources and the ceremonial and natural landscapes in which they are situated so they can be studied and appreciated by future generations, ● inspire wonder about its builders and their culture, its place in the world, and a sense of awe, ● provide a window to its builders and to the other ancient mound-building cultures that lived in what is now Ohio, ● provide a venue to increase understanding of the genius and life ways of the ancient people who developed and used the site, and ● connect visitors through experiential and educational means to the site’s rich legacies of the American Indian cultures that were associated with the site, and educate the public through museum exhibits, judicious use of interpretive signs, and publications about this remarkable American Indian achievement.

Ohio Brush Creek after a Spring Rain in 2015, viewed from the Serpent Tail Overlook. American Indians, during plan review in Oklahoma, identified Brush Creek as an important natural and cultural feature. 27

A Change in Vision In keeping with park visitation patterns dominating the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Serpent Mound was originally envisioned and developed not only as an archaeological preserve, but as a recreational park. Over the ensuing years, evolving technologies in transportation and communication systems, and notably, the invention and widespread use of air conditioning, impacted and shifted public trends in park visitation. When compared to the site’s inception and early years, visitors to Serpent Mound today demonstrate a much greater awareness of the international cultural significance of the site. They are more likely to visit the site for educational purposes, and travel much greater distances to get there. Modern management of the site now focuses primarily on interpreting and managing the site’s resources that gives the site its outstanding universal value, with recreational services in a secondary, supportive role. Developing Guiding Principles for the Plan Guiding Principles for this plan represent the dominant values that were expressed by major stakeholders and in the public outreach process.

The Guiding Principles are organized into four themes. They guided the preparation of the short, mid-range, and long-term action steps in the plan and will guide future decisions affecting the site.

Revere the Site and Maintain the Resources That Give the Site Outstanding Universal Value ● Serpent Mound will be recognized as a special place that is locally, regionally, and internationally valued as a sacred American Indian landscape that is visited and respected by people of all ethnic origins, beliefs, and lifestyles. ● Serpent Mound will be a place where people can experience this monumental ancient American Indian earthen sculpture and gain a broad understanding of its international cultural significance unimpeded by modern intrusions. ● Serpent Mound’s cultural features and environs will be preserved and protected for future generations, identifying and effectively addressing natural and man- made threats. ● Serpent Mound will be developed, managed, and interpreted commensurate with its national and international significance, whether or not inscription as a World Heritage Sites takes place.

Design and Manage to Preserve the Site ● The site design will be largely organic with fewer objects and minimal signage and will use visual cues to guide visitors in order to create a continual sense of

arrival and maintain a tranquil, bucolic setting with buffer zones and spaces for contemplation. ● Planning for the anticipated increase in visitors will reflect attendance projections for the site which will determine the size of new facilities and infrastructure and will avoid building near the Serpent Mound, burial mounds, and village habitations. ● A buffer zone will be established near the entrance at OH-73 to preserve the rural, undeveloped ambience of the park setting and the view perspective from the Serpent Mound. ● Site planning and maintenance will recognize the importance of establishing a relatively free visual corridor for public appreciation of one or more celestial alignments. ● Planning will acknowledge the historical importance of the Works Progress Administration buildings and the observation tower, while recognizing that the facilities do not contribute to the Outstanding Universal Value of Serpent Mound.

Interpret the Site ● A site appropriate, first-class orientation and interpretive experience will be made available to visitors during all hours that the site is open to the public, even when the museum is closed, by adding interpretive exhibits on the grounds. ● A world-class museum/visitor center will be developed with exhibits and visitor experiences that stimulate the intellect, spark the imagination, create a heart-

The existing visitor center, gift shop, and museum, due to its relatively small size and its location, places limitations on the capacity of the facility to serve increased visitation and also meet world-class visitors center/museum objectives in the plan.

connection, and serve all ages and cultures. New visitor facilities will complement and fit organically into the surrounding landscape. Their design will be inspired by the art and culture of the site’s early peoples and the fauna and flora of the native ecosystems and will reflect the resources that give the site its outstanding universal value. ● Continued archaeological and natural resource research will be sustained and supported at the site and will be used to increase understanding of the Serpent Mound and the other features, sustain interest and support of the site, and guide site development and management decisions.

Respect and Engage Local Residents and Other Valued Stakeholders ● Serpent Mound will be managed to recognize and engage the substantial local ownership and pride that exists for the site, reflecting the interdependence between the site and the community. ● Potential World Heritage Site status will be used as an opportunity to further increase local awareness and advance community pride. ● Economic development through heritage tourism will benefit the area. It will best be achieved by promoting heritage tourism and collaborating with local tourism partners. ● Increased visitation has the potential to generate road safety issues and other negative experiences in the community. Addressing these issues will require communication, outreach, and cooperation. ● Serpent Mound will benefit from the collaboration of the many and varied stakeholders of the site, demonstrating that networking and partnership are instrumental in achieving and sustaining an optimal experience for visitors and community. ● Recognizing that Adams County does not, at present, have the food and lodging infrastructure to realize the full economic benefit of anticipated increased visitation, community partnerships will inform and advance private sector investment critical to fill this need.

Installation of a drinking fountain adjacent to the new Adams County visitor information kiosk, responding to local interests and visitor needs. April, 2015

30 8. PROTECTION OF OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE

8.1 PROTECTION GOALS

● Conserve the material substance of the serpent mound effigy ● Maintain a buffer around the mound that is free of man-made or natural obstructions ● Avoid further development in proximity to the Serpent Mound, the burial mounds, and the ancient village habitations ● Protect view perspectives from unwanted development ● Preserve the rural aesthetic of the agricultural valley ● Preserve the health of the natural ecosystems within the site’s boundaries

8.2 NATIONAL INSTRUMENTS OF PROTECTION

National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 (36 CFR 800 – Protection of Historic Properties) provides for an assessment of adverse effects to historic properties and review and consultation for federally funded, permitted, or licensed activities. As a designated National Historic Landmark any such actions at the site, or in close proximity, would fall under this law.

National Historic Preservation Act Section 110(f) outlines the specific actions that an Agency must take when a National Historic Landmark (NHL) may be directly and adversely affected by an undertaking. Agencies must, "to the maximum extent possible...minimize harm" to NHLs affected by undertakings. Both Sections 106 and 110(f) also require Agencies to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking.

Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act stipulates that the Federal Highway Administration and other DOT agencies cannot approve the use of land from public owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or public and private historical sites unless the following conditions are met:

● There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of the land. ● The action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from use.

Ohio’s State Historic Preservation Office, which is designated to manage responsibilities delegated to the state of Ohio by Congress in the National Historic Preservation Act, is a division of the Ohio History Connection. This close in-house organizational relationship ensures the sharing of information, forthright communication and collaboration with regard to compliance with federal preservation laws and regulations.

View to the west taken from the coiled tail area of the Serpent Mound Effigy, Spring, 2015.

8.3 STATE INSTRUMENTS OF PROTECTION

Ohio Revised Code Section 149.32 provides for the dedication of archaeological sites by filing articles of dedication in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the site is located. Dedications must include terms restricting the use of the property which adequately provide for its preservation and protection, for restoration, where appropriate, and for archaeological research and study. Whenever possible and consistent with such purposes, the articles shall provide for public access in order that the maximum benefit be obtained. To be recorded, the dedication must be accepted by the director of the Ohio History Connection. Preserves dedicated under this section may not be taken for any other use or purpose except another public use or purpose after a finding by a court of common pleas of the existence of an imperative and unavoidable public necessity for such other public use or purpose.

Ohio Revised Code Section 2927.11 (A)(3) prohibits a person, without privilege to do so, from purposely defacing, damaging, polluting, or otherwise physically mistreating any historical or commemorative marker, or any structure, Indian mound or earthwork, cemetery, thing, or site of great historical or archaeological

interest. (B) declares that whoever violates this section is guilty of desecration, which in the case of subsection (A)(3) is a misdemeanor of the second degree.

Ohio Revised Code Section 2909.06(C) states that no person, without privilege to do so, shall knowingly cause serious physical harm to any tomb, monument, gravestone, or other similar structure that is used as a memorial for the dead; to any fence, railing, curb, or other property that is used to protect, enclosed, or ornament any cemetery; or to a cemetery. The penalties specified are for a felony of the fifth degree.

Ohio Revised Code Section 155.05 Violating rules at prehistoric parks states “No person shall willfully violate a reasonable rule governing the access to prehistoric parks or historic grounds made by a person, association, or company owning or having custody of such parks or grounds nor shall any person injure or mark structures, trees, or plants therein. Whoever violates this section is liable to such owners or custodians for damages. Ohio Revised Code Section 155.99 (B) states “whoever violates section 155.05 of the Revised Code is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

Ohio Revised Code Section 149.30 requires that the Ohio History Connection maintain and operate a system of state memorials (including properties owned by OHC) and requires legislative approval for the transfer or sale of Connection property if the state has a "financial interest" in the property. Since the state has made considerable investment in the development, maintenance, and operation of the site since it was acquired, the Ohio History Connection recognizes that the state has a financial interest in the property and that any sale or transfer of the property would require legislative approval.

Action Item ● Work to dedicate Serpent Mound as a Dedicated Archaeological Preserve under Ohio Revised Code Section 149.52.

8.4 OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF PROTECTION

Deed Restrictions: Deed (Appendix J) from Harvard College to the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, 6 October 1900, requires perpetual care and contains a reversion clause.

Serpent Mound Historic Site Management Plan: This plan substantively guides protection, future development, and use of the site. Its adoption by the Ohio History Connection’s Board of Trustees provides direction for funding requests to the Ohio legislature and private sector sources to take such actions as acquiring

33 additional property, conducting research, upgrading interpretation, increasing staffing, and so on. It will also guide operation and maintenance of the site to ensure that the cultural and natural resources are protected.

A subsequent master plan for the site will guide development to ensure that the goals and priorities established in the management plan will be implemented in such a way as to not jeopardize or impact the cultural resources which give the site its Outstanding Universal Value.

Action Item ● Develop a Master Plan to implement the recommendations of this site management plan.

9.0 BUFFER ZONES

Protecting the cultural resources that give this site its outstanding universal value is fundamental to the purpose of this management plan. This section identifies tools and strategies to address issues within the current site and those that may require property expansion or influencing development off-site.

Bordered by Ohio Brush Creek immediately to the west of the site, the nature of the surrounding environment consists of a pastoral agricultural valley and surrounding hills covered with recovering successional forest. Present access to the site is via an access road off of Ohio Route 73, approximately 7.5 miles northwest of Peebles, Ohio via Ohio Route 41. The access road leads to a surface parking lot approximately 1,000 feet from the entrance.

According to World Heritage Guidelines “. . . buffer zones should include the immediate setting surrounding the inscribed property, important views and other areas or attributes that are functionally important as a support to the site and its protection. “

Existing boundary of the site provides a minimum of a 50 m (164 ft) buffer adjacent to the effigy, to upwards of 100 m (328 ft). The property is large enough to provide a suitable setting for the effigy itself. However, the property is not large enough to accommodate enhanced or additional visitor services and still provide an adequate buffer for the burial mounds and without further disturbing ancient village habitation sites.

In ancient times, the people who built the mound and/or that occupied the site would have impacted the landscape. Since the site supported a substantial Fort Ancient village, there must have been agricultural use of the land, especially in the rich floodplain along Ohio Brush Creek.

Aerial view of the Serpent Mound area looking southeast, Ohio Brush Creek is visible in the lower 35 center of the photograph, the Serpent Mound effigy is located on a ridge in the wooded area just above the creek to the left, OH-73 can be seen traversing the landscape to the right. (Courtesy of Jeff Wilson)

There is little direct evidence, beyond the village sites, to determine the level of human disturbance at the Serpent Mound site proper during its periods of highest pre-settlement human activity, but there is literature supporting the view that the natural communities and ecology of the Ohio Valley and eastern North America were impacted by humans during pre-Colonial times, perhaps significantly so.

Relevant references include Local and regional sediment charcoal evidence for fire regimes in presettlement north-eastern North America, Journal of Ecology:365-382, Delcourt, Paul A and Hazel R Delcourt 2004; Prehistoric Native Americans and ecological change: human ecosystems in eastern North America since the Pleistocene, Cambridge University Press, Denevan, William M, 1992; and Indian use of fire and land clearance in the southern Appalachians, Fire and the environment: ecological and cultural perspectives. US For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-69:306-312.

Preservation of the forest buffers, protection of the Ohio Brush Creek corridor, and the conservation of agricultural fields are complementary and important planning strategies.

Today, the modern farm fields in the Ohio Brush Creek valley serve the site by providing a pastoral ambience. The recovering hardwood forests on many of the surrounding hills and along Ohio Brush Creek provide hints to the modern visitor of what the landscape may have looked like to the earlier indigenous people.

Unless protected, forests in the vicinity of the site are at risk of being harvested in short rotation and/or cleared for development. Protection of these forest lands would allow them to grow and mature into ecosystems that would be closer to the complexity that would have been found in pre-colonial forests, providing significant interpretive potential for teaching how ancient American Indians helped sustain themselves through hunting and plant-gathering.

At present, there is no zoning in Adams County and it is not politically feasible at this time for local governing bodies to institute such land use controls due to the strong preference of the community.

A view of the surrounding landscape to the north, from just above the overlook near the head of the Serpent Mound effigy, April 2014.

Additional land protection through easements, charitable gifts, or fee-simple acquisition is needed to expand the site, establish desired buffer zones and protect view perspectives. Buffer zones outside the property will only be created through the cooperation of willing landowners. Successful negotiation with private property owners outside the site boundary will be critical in acquiring additional land and securing such buffer zones and protecting view perspectives.

Creative tools, such as agricultural easements, standard conservation easements, and fee simple acquisition, will be used to establish buffer zones and protect view perspectives outside the site’s boundaries.

9.1 Buffer Zones at the Site Entrance Due to changes in the alignment of Ohio Route 73 and the construction of a new highway bridge over Brush Creek and the resulting relocation of the entrance to the site (Appendix G), approximately 100 feet of the site access road is across the public right of way. With the highway right-of-way controlled by the Ohio Department of Transportation and balance of the area owned by the Connection, unwanted development on the east side of Ohio Route 73 immediately adjacent to the entrance is prevented.

Action Item ● Establish buffer zones on each side of SR 73 to protect the entrance

9.2 Protection of View Perspectives Outside the Site Property The land in the valley below Serpent Mound has been in agriculture use for many years and most likely will be beyond the foreseeable future, since there is no sewer system in the area and most of the properties are family farms.

Section 1.0 Agriculture of the 2011 Adams County Land Use Plan, is devoted to goals and strategies to sustain farming, and specifically cites maintaining family farms as the first goal. At the same time, the land use plan acknowledges aging farm families and loss of farmland in the county as a concern. Strategies in the County’s land use plan do not include zoning or related land use controls.

Action Items ● Secure agricultural easements on agricultural lands in the valley and conservation easements, or alternatively, purchase outright the forested lands surrounding the existing site that are preliminarily identified through plan mapping (see computer generated visualizations in Appendix H and contour mapping of ridge views in Appendix I). These properties are generally located in an arc seen from Serpent Mound looking to the southwest and continuing in a clockwise arc terminating in the southeast. o The criteria used to identify view perspectives in the valley worthy of protection was determined to be what is visible from the overlooks at the head and tail of the Serpent Mound. The view from the overlook at the head of the effigy coincides with the summer solstice sunset alignment; thus, this view perspective is especially important to protect. ● Promoting “land use preservation payments” is an identified strategy in the County’s land use plan and comparable to the Clean Ohio Agricultural Easement Purchase Program of the Ohio Department of Agriculture. Making use of this program to preserve view perspectives serves the dual purpose of meeting Serpent Mound site plan goals and the County’s land use plan. However, this program is very competitive and grants are usually made to farms with Ohio’s highest rated soils. ● Additional tools to advance protection of view perspectives are charitable gifts and fee-simple purchase, subject to the interest and willingness of land owners.

The wooded embankment across Ohio Brush Creek and agricultural land to the northwest, as seen from the Serpent Tail overlook, is outside of the present site boundary.

9.3 Buffer Zones within the Site Property The existing property boundary of the parcel owned by the Ohio History Connection provides a sufficient buffer for the protection of the effigy itself. Currently, the property is not large enough to accommodate enhanced or additional visitor services or any needed or desired development as a result of the potential World Heritage designation. Nor is there enough land to provide an adequate buffer for the burial mounds and the ancient village sites. Moreover, at present structures and hard surfaces for parking and traffic circulation intrude on the archaeological resources associated with the village and burial sites and disrupt the visual and spatial connections with the Serpent Mound. Thus additional acreage is needed to meet the needs of future visitors and to protect the site’s cultural resources.

In order to preserve the qualities that give this site its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) and also meet other guiding principles for this plan, the master plan process should: 1) investigate options that reduce existing development in proximity to any of the cultural features that give the site its Outstanding Universal Value, and 2) identify suitable new locations for access and visitor service and educational facilities.

Action Items • Ensure any improvements to existing facilities or the site work toward the goal of having fewer buildings in the vicinity of the effigy, the burial mounds, and ancient village sites. However, until new facilities can be built, investments in existing facilities will be necessary to improve the visitor experience, e.g. replacing the existing museum exhibits. ● The master plan process should consider the following two scenarios and other options: 1) a design alternative that removes most facilities and services from the ridge area, with the majority of facilities and services to be located in the valley somewhere adjacent to OH-73 and with convenient access to the ridge to the serpent effigy and the other resources. 2) a design alternative with the same goal as number 1, but rather identify and evaluate properties adjacent to the existing site parcel to the east and to the south offering access from either OH-73 or from Horner Chapel Road.

New research – including archaeological, natural history, and historical investigation – will help to inform future development planning for the site. Targeted research should be designed to advance this plan and future master planning.

9.4 Protection of View Perspectives within the Site Property Areas surrounding the serpent effigy within the existing property boundary are now covered in forest, following nearly complete clearing in the mid- to late 1800’s. The large trees in the immediate area of the Serpent Mound were likely planted in the early days of operation. Putnam noted in 1883 and which is verified in Kimball’s photographs, that only two maple trees were growing in the immediate vicinity of the Serpent Mound at the time.

Tree limbs encroaching on visitors’ views of the effigy, both at ground level and from the observation tower should be trimmed or removed as need. In doing so, consideration will be given to the aesthetics of specimen trees. If it is determined removal of the encroaching trees is necessary, the potential erosion caused by removal of the particular tree and the rarity and significance of them will be considered.

Example of tree branches encroaching on the view of the Serpent Effigy coils near the tail in 2014

Maintaining the view perspective of the summer solstice sunset alignment will allow visitor to observe an attribute contributing to the site’s outstanding universal value. At the same time, there is debate as to the number of solar, lunar, and planetary alignments that were intended by the original architects of Serpent Mound. Until there is additional study and agreement regarding these other possible alignments, trees will not be moved or trimmed to accommodate viewing them.

This view towards the head of the serpent effigy shows that there a significant number of trees at and adjacent to the mound, June 2014.

Tree shade is critical for visitors’ enjoyment of the site, especially in the extremely hot and humid months of July and August. The landscape trees on the mowed park grounds were all planted within a few years of each other, and, because they are growing in open conditions on thin poor soils, a significant number of the trees are currently in poor condition and/or dying.

Action Items ● Regularly trim tree limbs so that view perspectives of the serpent effigy at ground level and from the observation tower are maintained. ● Identify and remove aging and unhealthy trees and other trees subject to wind-throw that would cause catastrophic damage to the fabric of the effigy and associated archaeological resources. ● Establish a monitoring plan and assess annually whether trimming limbs is sufficient to maintain the view perspective of the effigy mound or if tree removal is necessary. If tree removal is necessary, follow professional horticultural practices and grind stumps in the vicinity of the effigy or in view from area of the effigy while taking extreme care to avoid damage to the integrity of the mound or other archaeological resources. ● Assess annually whether trimming limbs is sufficient to maintain the view perspective along the summer solstice sunset alignment. If tree removal appears to be needed, determine if it can be done without damaging the serpent effigy or the stability of the bluff. If damage is unavoidable, consider other alternatives. ● Identify and remove invasive species on the ridge in the area of the Serpent Mound and throughout the developed areas and open spaces in the site and remove any dead or hazardous trees which might be a public safety hazard, a potential threat to buildings and features, or pose an overall liability. An expert will be used to identify invasive species, assess tree conditions, and prepare a plan for their removal. All such activities will be conducted following best practices and taking care to protect cultural resources. ● Prepare a landscape plan that will include: o planting native tree species that are long lived, and can tolerate open windy conditions on relatively poor soils that are derived from site’s dolomitic bedrock. Native oaks are ideal choices for these purposes, especially the adaptable and long-lived white oaks, chestnut oaks, and chinquapin oaks (the latter specifically

adapted to alkaline bedrocks). Of the other native upland oaks, black oaks are not long-lived and red oaks prefer more mesic sites. o planting locations that will avoid any areas close to the effigy mound or the village and burial sites. Plantings should not obstruct the spatial relationship of the effigy to the village sites and burial mounds.

10.0 RESOURSE CONSERVATION, PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENTS

10.1 Steps Through the Tail of the Serpent Mound Effigy A set of steps through the tail of the effigy were constructed during the depression era. These steps are an intrusion that affects the integrity of the effigy, negatively affecting its outstanding universal value.

Action Item ● Remove the steps in the tail area of the serpent mound effigy and restore the mound in consultation with staff archaeologists at the Ohio History Connection and confer with interpretative staff to determine appropriate ways to interpret the coil. Use the existing contours of the mound and previous research to determine material, height, and contour to restore the mound after the steps’ removal.

Stone steps through the tail of the Serpent Mound effigy, June 2014.

10.2 Stability of the Bluff and Ridge There is concern regarding the potential risk to the integrity of the Serpent Mound due to possible instability of the bluff due to erosion below the head of the serpent effigy and below its tail. There is also concern about the integrity of the bedrock in areas of the ridge near the effigy. Concerns range from stability of the limestone bluffs to hydraulic water movement in and around the ridge to

erosion and stormwater control. These are of sufficient concern to warrant investigation.

Action Item ● Conduct a geologic and hydrogeologic study of the bluff and the ridge to assess the above identified concerns, to determine level of risk, and to secure recommendations for treatment on a priority basis. The study should include evaluating stability issues at the overlooks at both the head and the tail, identifying the rate of bedrock slump, evaluating storm water management and investigating other measures to mitigate identified issues.

Existing ersoion in an area of the bluff not far from overlook at the head of the serpent effigy.

10.3 Safety and Security There have been occasional incidents of trespass and vandalism on the site over the years and in the recent past, some of them occurring at night when the site was closed. Some of these trespass events resulted in objects being inserted into the mound, including crystal points, potted plants, and “energy chargers.”

Although illegal after-hour access may not be able to be completely stopped, steps have been taken recently to limit after-hour access by closing the entrance gate every evening and reopening it in the morning and by installing camera surveillance systems. These steps should decrease the number of after-hour incursions on the site.

The site is currently open to the public every day of the year from 9 am to dusk. There are blocks of time, especially in the winter and early evening when the site

is open but the museum is closed and there is no on-site personnel to monitor visitors. To ameliorate the situation, the currently vacant site residence will be renovated so that staff or others can once again live there to provide greater security.

Caretaker’s residence is presently vacant due its deteriorated condition and need for rehabilitation before occupancy.

Admission to the site is technically free of charge due to the deed restrictions transferring the property to the Ohio History Connection (see original deed language in Appendix J). However, since 1981 a parking fee has been charged for vehicles to generate revenue to fund operations, maintenance, and security at the site.

Frederic Ward Putnam had felt that the park should be free, resulting in the deed restriction. But Putnam also wrote, “So long as the place is respected and guarded by all who visit it, the park will be free to all, but should any vandalism be committed, an arrangement would at once be made to put a keeper at the place, and possibly entrance fees would have to be charged in order to pay the expense.” Eliminating the restriction would provide more flexibility in collecting user fees at the site to address the concerns of Putnam which have come to be realized.

Action Items ● Continue to identify, assess, and implement other options to improve security at the site. ● Incorporate messaging in visitor orientation that encourages visitor monitoring and reporting of vandalism, looting, and related inappropriate behavior.

● Renegotiate the terms of the gift of the property from Harvard College in 1900 with Harvard University to permit the charging of admission fees.

10.4 Existing Visitor Facilities Depression era buildings and structures and the observation tower are in all likelihood eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The structures and buildings include the barn, museum and concessions building, the overlooks, two comfort stations, the caretaker’s house, and the garage.

The observation tower provides a view of the serpent effigy that enables the visitor to fully take in its full breadth, creating a memorable experience. However, it is not handicapped accessible and is difficult to climb for people with physical limitations. It does not meet current safety standards and at times it is hazardous. And it is too close to the effigy mound.

These historic features have served the park-oriented nature of the site for decades and are of historic and experiential value. Nevertheless, their location is of another time and understanding. They are too close to the serpent effigy, burial mounds and village occupations and interrupt the visual and spatial relationship of these resources.

It is a long term goal to remove the buildings, parking facilities, and other man- made intrusions from the ridge. These visitor facilities, services, and amenities are to be relocated to where they will not intrude into this area.

Action Items ● Works Progress Administration-built buildings – make use of these structures until such time as they no longer serve a useful purpose in site operations, require significant capital investment to maintain or rehabilitate, or at such time that the financial resources are available to relocate or remove specific buildings. ● Observation tower – develop and assess alternatives to provide a viewing experience comparable to seeing the effigy at the height and perspective from the tower and that provide access to the experience for those of all ages and physical limitations. Consider a range of alternatives including moving and modifying the existing tower, a new tower at a different location, a viewing area constructed above the museum, a remotely operated camera and a monitor.

While there is considerable appreciation of the observation tower, a site feature that still stands after over 100 years; rust is an ongoing maintenance issue; the steep steps in rain, snow and ice conditions make it less safe; and there is no handicap accessibility.

11.0 RESEARCH

11.1 Research Informs Management and Interpretation Research in archaeology, history, natural history, and additional fields contributes to the understanding of the Serpent Mound, other cultural resources on the property, and the environment in which those resources exist. Research also impacts interpretation of the site, sustains interest and support, guides site development and management decisions, and in the end, protects the site’s cultural resources. Currently the Ohio History Connection policy is to conduct investigations prior to ground disturbance at the site to determine the location of archaeological resources so that they can be preserved or any potential adverse effects mitigated. For minimal disturbances such as digging post holes the standard is to have a staff archaeologist present. For major disturbances Ohio History Connection archaeology staff will require full investigation of the area to be impacted.

The Ohio History Connection requires a professional research design to consider before permitting archaeological or natural history research at Serpent Mound and its other sites. Some archaeological research may be initiated and conducted by Ohio History Connection staff. Other research may be conducted by qualified individuals working under a permit issued by the Ohio History Connection. Research proposals are submitted to the Ohio History Connection’s Curator of Archaeology for projects associated with archaeology and to the Curator of Natural History for projects related to the natural history of the site. Proposals are evaluated by the relevant staff and reviewed by the Ohio History Connection’s Collections Management Team. If the relevant Ohio History Connection staff, including the Collections Management Team, determines the proposal has merit, it will be forwarded to the Director of Museum and Library Services for final review and approval (see Ohio History Connection Archaeological Survey/Excavation Permit in Appendix L). In this process, outside peer reviewers are consulted if Ohio History Connection staff determines additional expertise to evaluate certain aspects of the proposal is needed. Successful applicants are required to schedule all their activities on site with the site’s manager.

Archaeological survey was conducted prior to this water line installation for a drinking fountain in April 2015.

11.2 Serpent Mound in Scientific and Other Literature Serpent Mound is not just an archaeological/historical resource; it is part of a much larger cultural and social fabric. One example is Marge Piercy’s poem about the mound quoted in Section 1.0. Other examples include the following:

● Serpent Mound is an early example of historic preservation in the United States (Lynott 2003; T. F King and Lyneis 1978). Putnam’s efforts to save the site in the 1880s is one of the first preservation efforts in Ohio and nationally. ● Putnam’s work at Serpent Mound and related subsequent curation of material aided the national development of museum science in America (e.g., Dexter 1966). ● Astronomical alignments have been proposed as determining key elements of the design of Serpent Mound. Other writing suggests that Serpent Mound might be a representation of Halley’s Comet’s appearance in A.D. 1066 (Pauketat and DiPaolo Loren 2005). ● Serpent Mound has been widely cited as an example of an ancient site that has spiritual or sacred significance for various modern audiences and is known worldwide (e.g., Brockman 2011). ● Serpent Mound is cited as an example of ancient death patterns, such as in the Journal of Death and Dying (Green 2001). ● The site is often cited as a prime example of a sacred place in the Americas in European sources such as by Hunt (1991) in France and Wake (1873) in England. ● The geoglyph is widely recognized as a work of art (e.g., Doss 2011; S. Hodge 2006; J. King 1986; Christinger 1980). ● References to Serpent Mound in poetry, in addition to Marge Piercy’s work, can be found in Ed Davis’ Appalachian Heritage, in Sam Bradley’s work published by the Poetry Foundation, and in Jacki Marunycz’s work published by the Nebraska University Press, to name a few.

● The Serpent Mound, as a symbol of various things old and new, has been mentioned in several works of fiction (e.g., Allen 2010).

11.3 Future Research at Serpent Mound Despite the widespread and diverse references there has been fairly limited archaeological investigation at the site since Putnam’s original excavations.

Guidance for conducting archaeological research at World Heritage Sites is provided in Timothy Darvill’s 2007 paper, Research frameworks for World Heritage Sites and the conceptualization of archaeological knowledge. Darvill states that “following placement on the World Heritage Sites list continued research is encouraged within the wider context of protecting, conserving and presenting cultural and natural heritage, and giving it a function in the life of the community.”

For his archaeological research at Stonehenge in 2005, Darvill established that archaeological research should: ● underpin curatorial work in relation to the management of the archaeological resource in the area, allowing decisions to be firmly based and fairly judged; ● maximize the return in terms of archaeological knowledge and

insight that arises from routine land-management works, property development and land-use change; ● stimulate dynamic and innovative approaches to the study of archaeological deposits and materials in the area through problem- orientated and curiosity-driven research initiatives in order to expand the knowledge base and increase public understanding and awareness of the past; and ● inform the presentation and interpretation of the World Heritage Site to the public.

Darvill identifies types of knowledge of value derived from archaeological research that is particularly relevant to World Heritage sites: ● Narrative knowledge - Linear and non-linear accounts, stories, discourse, explanations and understandings of how things were in the past, as viewed from the present. Scientific knowledge. Foundationalist or coherentist/ naturalistic knowledge. This is shared knowledge. ● Strategic knowledge - Perspectives, opinions, and judgments of an executive kind providing the basis of guidance for management and conservation measures and decision-making. Views about the ‘rightness’ or acceptability of an opinion, position, or approach based upon conformity or match with approved or accepted value systems and ethical codes. This is shared knowledge.

● Indigenous knowledge - Accounts, explanations and understandings of how things were in the past as brought into the present from earlier traditions. Including: folklore, memories and elements of intangible heritage. This is shared knowledge. ● Contemplative knowledge - Beliefs and understandings that provide a basis for attachment to a place or time or event and/or establishing an identity. Insights gained by thinking through and rationalizing the implications of direct sensual engagements with aspects of the real world. This is personal knowledge.

Research Committee small group work session during the two-day planning retreat, November 21 and 22, 2014

11.4 Research Priorities ● Initial Research Priorities ○ Determine the age of Serpent Mound ○ Determine how was it built and its structure ○ Define and describe all cultural occupations at the site ○ Provide information that can be used to establish a local and regional context ○ Further identify and clarify how Serpent Mound fits into a global context ○ Engage American Indians about questions they would want to have addressed through further research. ● Factors to consider and guide research: ○ Encourage research into all aspects of Serpent Mound and foster an inclusive and collegial intellectual environment ○ Make research results more accessible to a wider set of audiences while protecting sensitive data ○ Include some public education component as part of all research activities, including for Adams County residents

○ Use research to inform interpretation of the site and guide the visitor experience ○ Use research to answer the questions asked by the public and other audiences, especially American Indians ○ Develop accurate mapping of the site’s archaeological resources to inform planning and ensure that the resources are protected ○ Make artifacts from previous and future research projects available for exhibits. When possible, borrow artifacts held by other institutions for exhibits. ● Funding for Research ○ Research needs to be a priority for funding

Action Items ● Develop a Baseline Archaeological Inventory of the Serpent Mound site ○ Assemble all existing research reports from previous investigations such as the research conducted for Section 106 compliance for the restroom improvements in 2011-2012, previous research projects investigating the serpent effigy, and the investigations for the installation of a new water line across the property in the early 1990s. (The rumor that a burial site was discovered near the park entrance when OH-73 was relocated was investigated with an extensive records search but could not be validated.) ○ Prepare a composite map of the site to document known archaeological resources. Putnam’s 1887 map has never been geo-referenced with modern site plans. A composite map should include overlaying Putnam’s map onto a surveyed or GIS plan. o Use geophysics such as a gradiometer survey to determine the locations of past excavations and to identify the location of the Fort Ancient and Adena village sites and burials. ● Research and prepare a baseline Inventory of natural resources with a focus on learning about the paleo-environment. ● Form a Research Review Committee that includes professional expertise outside of the Connection to assist with establishing research priorities and review research requests at Serpent Mound and at other Ohio History Connection sites with significant archaeological resources.

F. W. PUTNAM’S MAP of SERPENT MOUND: Putnam’s 1890 sketch map shows the general location of archaeological resources, yet is not specific enough to accurately map locations for future interpretation and site management planning purposes. 54

12.0 VISITOR USE OF THE SITE

Potential World Heritage Site designation is accelerating the change in how Serpent Mound is viewed and used. From Putnam’s early vision of the site as a park with every tree native to Ohio, to an outline on a 1933-34 survey showing a planned, but never built “chicken park”, to the Depression Era improvements, to contemporary respect for the site as a sacred place and for its American Indian origins and continuing cultural connections, there is an ongoing evolution of the purpose and appropriate use of the site, especially in those areas nearest to the Serpent Mound, the burial mounds, and the village sites.

Following the circuitous pathway around the Serpent Mound effigy is an essential element of the visitor experience.

12.1 Visitor Needs and Site Design Meeting visitor needs and expectations need to be balanced with the goals of minimizing intrusions and limiting development near the serpent effigy and village habitation areas.

Visitor needs and expectations cannot be ignored. Shade on the hot and humid summer days common to south-central Ohio; a place to sit and rest, which could also serve as a place to pause and reflect; a walkable distance from parking or a drop-off location to effigy mound; and suitable trails for wheel-chairs or assistance pushing wheel-chairs around the site are some of the specific needs that have been identified.

Additional visitors need to be accommodated without negatively impacting the resources. The existing site has inherent limitations and there is limited suitable space on the existing site to relocate facilities to ensure the preservation of those cultural resources which give the site its outstanding universal value while making improvements to develop a world-class visitor experience.

Site Design Recommendations • Provide places to linger and to contemplate in the area of the serpent effigy • Change material of the pathway to something more organic • Consider aligning the pathway with the curves of the effigy while maintaining a respectful distance • Relocate the granite monument away from Serpent Mound • Identify a suitable location/s for benches, near, but not adjacent to the Serpent Mound that will minimize visual impact. • Assuming the master plan design results in moving the parking area further from the Serpent Mound than the present parking lot, the design should provide for a drop-off location reasonably near the starting point for the visitor experience.

Action Item • Create a landscape plan as part of the master plan to improve the visitor experience while not impacting the site’s cultural and natural resources • In the future, provide a new museum facility

12.2 Access for People with Disabilities A significant number of visitors to the site have limited ability to circumnavigate the effigy and use the observation tower. Future development of the site will balance the overarching vision to reduce intrusions at the site while providing access to the site for people of all ages and physical ability.

Providing appropriate alternative modes of transportation such as electrically powered wheel-chairs, places to sit and rest, or a self-operated camera location as an alternative to accessing the observation tower are a few examples.

Action Item • Design programs and facilities so that that they are accessible to disabled people so that they meet the spirit as well as the letter of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1991 and other requirements.

12.3 Event and Access Management Serpent Mound Special Use Permit: Procedures and Policies was adopted by the Arc of Appalachia with the support of the Ohio History Connection in December 2014 (see Appendix K). The purpose of the procedures and policies to insure that other uses of the site are appropriate and do not impact the cultural resources of the site and the experiences of visitors and other users.

13.0 INTERPRETATION and EDUCATION

13.1 Interpretative Framework Interpretation is not simply about providing information, but rather establishing a context in time and place, providing information about an object or event, allowing visitors to make personal connections, and expanding the audience’s understanding of the past. At Serpent Mound, the primary focus of interpretation is sharing what we know about this amazing piece of our ancient past and providing visitors with the tools to make meaningful connections to the site’s history. Interpretation of the site needs to include the perspectives, beliefs, and voices of American Indians.

13.2 Interpretive Plan This plan’s interpretation recommendations are preliminary to the preparation of an Interpretive Plan. Decisions regarding final interpretive themes, storylines, media type, interpretive signage and kiosk content, design and location of interpretive elements, exhibit design, website content, use of social media, and so on will be accomplished through development and implementation of an Interpretive Plan, and as master planning progresses.

An over-arching dynamic facing Serpent Mound with regard to interpretation is the breadth of visitor demographic and belief systems. It is a well-known reality that many non-Indians also consider these places sacred. Different tribes, as well as different people, experience these places in diverse ways.

During management plan review with the tribes in Oklahoma, the planning team heard that the effigy, village habitations and burials are considered “sacred ground” and that people should treat Serpent Mound with the same respect they would give to a church or temple, to the Declaration of Independence, or the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall.

Each and every visitor may not feel or embrace the sacred nature, but they can be respectful and be touched by the history, the feat of construction, the beauty, and more.

Ultimately, Serpent Mound’s approach to interpretation and management will provide opportunity for visitors to experience the site in their own preferred manner so long as it does not impinge on a quality experience for others. It is not

necessary to promote or interpret all cultural and natural components and all possible stories and beliefs associated with the site.

13.3 Recommendations for the Interpretive Plan

Interpretive Themes • Serpent Mound is a very ancient ceremonial site built and designed by American Indians to represent their beliefs in the context of the surrounding cultural and natural environment. • The site of Serpent Mound was used over thousands of years by different American Indian cultures and represents a piece of the puzzle in understanding of the mound building tradition over time. • Understanding Serpent Mound involves an exploration of how we know what we know and what questions still remain. • Serpent Mound holds special significance to present day American Indians and many other people in various backgrounds • The environment of Serpent Mound - Ohio Brush Creek and the forests - was very important to the indigenous people who built Serpent Mound and lived nearby serving their needs. Having opportunities to learn about that environment is especially important to visitors who come to the site with little knowledge of eastern America’s deciduous forest biome.

Interpretive Recommendations ● Give visitors a context for understanding what Serpent Mound is o When was it built, who built it, for what purpose? o How it was used in ancient times, what did people do at the site? o What was the role of natural environment to the site and its use? o How does the geoglyph relate to solar and other celestial patterns? ● Allow the visitor to explore the layered history of the site o Visualize the mound in time and context o Learn about the mound building tradition and evolution o Understand it as American Indian sacred place today ● Generate a feeling, a mood, a state of being o Celebrate the value of the unknown o Sense its mystery o Be in awe as to its uniqueness and spirituality o Understand universal human experiences, such as family and loss o Create a sense of wonder, desire to learn more ● Create a world-class interpretative experience o Provide world class facilities and exhibits o Greet visitors with professional, well informed and skilled staff o Provide mediated and unmediated experiences o Determine and understand the site’s audiences and their needs, including international visitors o Employ best interpretive practices for audience age groups and multi-cultural visitors ● Give American Indians their rightful voice in the interpretation of the site by working with federally recognized tribes.

Action Items ● Prepare an interpretive plan to guide future interpretation at the site. ● Establish an interpretation/education roundtable to assist with developing and implementing interpretive messages, themes, storylines, media selection, etc.

● Work with the interpretive staff at the sites included in the Hopewell Ceremonial Earthworks World Heritage nomination, federally-recognized tribes, academic institutions, and local schools. ● Coordinate interpretation of the site with the Ancient Ohio Trail.

View of railing on the lower level platform on the 1908 Observation Tower, a potential location for interpretive display panels.

● Create outdoor exhibits o unobtrusive o high emotional/ intellectual impact o minimal, unobtrusive signage close to the effigy o comprehensive story with outside, more details in the museum and on-line • Create exterior kiosk with visitor orientation, basic interpretation of the site, and between the parking lot and the museum • Replace the existing museum exhibits to complement the new exterior exhibits and provide more details. o Enrich the exhibits by using artifacts from the site, including, if possible, items borrowed from the Peabody Museum and images taken when Putnam was at the site. • Provide web content and links in interpretive media

• Use the Museum Shop to enhance site interpretation o Provide merchandise that educates the public and interprets the site o Provide educational material and products relating to the Ohio History Connection, the Arc of Appalachia, and other World Heritage sites o Follow the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-644), which prohibits misrepresentation in marketing American Indian arts and crafts products (see Appendix M).

13.4 UNESCO World Heritage Education Goals Potential future designation of Serpent Mound as a World Heritage site will provide opportunities to convey UNESCO‘s and World Heritage’s goals and ideals to the public. World Heritage Site Guidelines (Ringbeck) recommend that communications should convey both the idea of the World Heritage program and the outstanding universal value of the World Heritage site as well as the resulting responsibilities and opportunities. The international dimension calls for a multilingual approach.

14.0 VISITATION and REGIONAL TOURISM

14.1 Visitation Total visitation at the Serpent Mound site has been approximately 30,000 a year over the past several years based on counted visitors and estimates of the number of visitors off hours and off season when the visitors are not counted. It is anticipated that over the next several years total visitation will increase slowly. At these levels, the impact of these visitors is not seen as a risk to the integrity of the site. However, sites inscribed on the World Heritage List and marketed successfully have seen visitation increase ten-fold (BaxStarr Consulting Group, Economic Impact of the Potential Inscription of the Hopewell Ceremonial Earthworks as World Heritage Sites, 2013).

14.2 Regional Tourism

Tourism and especially heritage tourism, area/regional capacity to meet visitor needs, and mechanisms to guide a successful visitor experience and generate a positive local resident experience are important components of planning for the future of Serpent Mound.

Adams County is a rural county within a rural region. As documented in the 2014 Adams County Economic Development/Tourism Study, the county has a small population that is spread out and has slow growth (Appendix N). For the foreseeable future, Adams County will continue to be rural.

Significant tourism-associated economic development opportunities were identified in the study. The study also identified substantial needs for marketing and for tourism amenities to realize those economic development opportunities. Similar opportunities and needs exist for Serpent Mound, even if it does not become a World Heritage Site. Working with local and county officials and other stakeholders provides an opportunity to meet the needs of the county as well as the site.

To support and grow tourism and thus experience the economic benefits of heritage tourism, the county needs more visitor services and amenities such as dine-in, sit-down restaurants that can accommodate tour buses and additional hotel rooms. When this plan was prepared the available beds in the county had a utilization rate of 70-80%.

Addressing the need for visitor services and amenities appropriately falls to the private sector. However, using public/private sector economic development partnerships to achieve community goals is a common and effective practice throughout the United States. Given the existing infrastructure and economic conditions in the region, such partnerships are needed and are critical.

Map of Adams County tourist attractions from the Adams County Economic Development/Tourism Study

The Heritage Tourism Program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation publishes a survival toolkit for communities and other heritage tourism publications, and offers guidance on communities and successful heritage tourism efforts.

Action Items ● Develop a partnership outreach plan – The Ohio History Connection and the Arc of Appalachia working with the Serpent Mound Advisory Council will develop a plan to ensure that effective communication methods are in place so that Adams County businesses and residents can fully realize the benefits of World Heritage designation. The plan should ensure also that citizen concerns can be brought forward and addressed. Goals and objectives to achieve effective communication include: o Approach Adams County residents with the appreciation that most people in the county have a feeling of ownership and respect for the site. Culturally, Adams County is about people dealing with people more in person that through other means. o Continually acknowledge that healthy community relationships are important to short- and long-term success o Maintain a consistent and accurate web-presence for the site by all primary stakeholders o Conduct public education meetings in various self-identified communities – include education about World Heritage sites and tools for understanding and accommodating travelers from around the world o As land is acquired to expand the site, provide information so that the public can understand why the land is needed and how it will be used o Explore partnerships and interest with nearby counties — Ross County, Highland County, Scioto County, Warren County, and Hamilton County/City of Cincinnati, and potential regional partners. ● Define Success – Monitor and periodically revisit what defines success for Serpent Mound as a World Heritage Site, for Adams County and area residents, for other critical stakeholders and for visitors. Ask visitors over time, are they getting the right “take-aways” in terms of their experience at the site and in the region.

Adams County Commissioner Paul Worley presenting Serpent Mound of Tomorrow committee recommendations to the large group at the two-day planning retreat, 65 November 21 & 22, 2014