DOCSLIB.ORG

A Cultural Resources Assessment Survey Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Cultural Resources Assessment Survey Of Exhibit J CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE 280-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT PROPERTY LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared for: Avalon Engineering, Inc. 2503 Del Prado Blvd., Suite 200 Cape Coral, Florida 33904 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 April 2020 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE 280-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT PROPERTY LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared for: Avalon Engineering, Inc. 2503 Del Prado Blvd., Suite 200 Cape Coral, Florida 33904 Conducted by: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy – Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath - Project Archaeologist Nelson Rodriguez - Archaeologist April 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a cultural resource assessment survey (CRAS) of 280-Unit Multi-Family Project property for Avalon Engineering, Inc. in Lee County. The property is roughly 14 acres in size. The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 CFR Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. The archaeological APE was defined as the project footprint, and the historical APE was the project footprint and adjacent properties. This work completed in April 2020 was conducted as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The survey was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 36 CRF Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. It also complies with the provisions contained in Chapter 267 and 373, Florida Statutes (FS). It was carried out in conformity with the standards contained in the Florida Division of Historical Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003). In addition, this study meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code. The archaeological and historical/architectural field surveys were conducted in April 2020. Background research and a review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and the NRHP indicated that there are no sites recorded within the APE, nor are there any recorded within one mile of the APE. The property was considered to have a low to moderate archaeological potential. Although a wetland was located along the eastern property line, none of the soil types within the tract have a positive correlation with sites, and in fact, they have a negative correlation with sites. As a result of field survey, including the excavation of 19 shovel test pits, no archaeological sites were discovered within the APE. Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that no historic resources are located within the APE, but 8LL00638 was recorded immediately to the west of the APE. It was a ca. 1920 Frame Vernacular style residence, but it is no longer extant. The Lee County property appraiser data indicated no historic structures within the APE and none were evident on the aerial photos of the area (FDOT 1972; USDA 1944, 1953, 1958, 1968; Wilkinson 2020). The field investigations confirmed the absence of historic resources within the APE. Based on these results, it is the opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will have no effect on any cultural resources, including archaeological sites or historic resources that are listed, determined eligible, or appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Location and setting .................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Geology and Geomorphology ................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................. 2-3 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations .......................................................................... 2-4 3.0 CULTURAL OVERVIEW ..................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Paleoindian ................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.3 Caloosahatchee .......................................................................................................... 3-4 3.4 Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-6 3.5 Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-7 3.6 Civil War and Aftermath ........................................................................................... 3-9 3.7 Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-12 3.8 APE Specifics .......................................................................................................... 3-14 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND FIELD METHODOLOGY ............... 4-1 4.1 Background Research and Literature Review ........................................................... 4-1 4.2 Archaeological Considerations .................................................................................. 4-1 4.3 Historical Considerations .......................................................................................... 4-5 4.4 Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-6 4.5 Inadvertent/Unexpected Discovery of Cultural Materials ......................................... 4-6 4.6 Laboratory Methods/Curation ................................................................................... 4-7 5.0 SURVEY RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 5-1 5.1 Archaeological .......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Historical ................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5-3 6.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDIX Survey log ii TABLE OF FIGURES, TABLE, AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure Figure 1.1. Location of the 280-Unit Multi-Family Project APE, Lee County. ............................... 1-2 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the 280-Unit, Multi-Family Project APE............................... 2-2 Figure 2.2. Soil types within the APE. ............................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. .................................................................................... 3-1 Figure 3.2. 1872 plat showing the APE. ......................................................................................... 3-10 Figure 3.3. 1944 and 1972 aerial photographs of the APE. ............................................................ 3-15 Figure 4.1. Location of the previously resource adjacent to the APE. ............................................. 4-2 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests within the APE. ................................................................. 5-2 Table Table 4.1. CRAS projects conducted within 3.2 km ( 2 mi) of the APE......................................... 4-1 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. ............................................................ 4-3 Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by soil type within the Caloosahatchee Valley. ............................. 4-3 Photo Photo 2.1. Shovel testing in the eastern vegetated strip. ................................................................. 2-1 Photo 2.2. Western portion of the property, facing south. ............................................................... 2-3 Photo 5.1. Soil profile in Wabasso sand. ......................................................................................... 5-1 Photo 5.2. Soil profile in the area of Boca sand. ............................................................................. 5-3 iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a cultural resource assessment survey (CRAS) of the approximately 14-acre, 280-Unit Multi-Family Project property in Lee County for Avalon Engineering, Inc. The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Testing a Model to Investigate Calusa Salvage of 16Th- and Early-17Th-Century Spanish Shipwrecks
    THEY ARE RICH ONLY BY THE SEA: TESTING A MODEL TO INVESTIGATE CALUSA SALVAGE OF 16TH- AND EARLY-17TH-CENTURY SPANISH SHIPWRECKS by Kelsey Marie McGuire B.A., Mercyhurst University, 2007 A thesis submitted to the Department of Anthropology College of Arts, Social Sciences, and Humanities The University of West Florida In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts 2014 The thesis of Kelsey McGuire is approved: ____________________________________________ _________________ Amy Mitchell-Cook, Ph.D., Committee Member Date ____________________________________________ _________________ Gregory Cook, Ph.D., Committee Member Date ____________________________________________ _________________ Marie-Therese Champagne, Ph.D., Committee Member Date ____________________________________________ _________________ John Worth, Ph.D., Committee Chair Date Accepted for the Department/Division: ____________________________________________ _________________ John R. Bratten, Ph.D., Chair Date Accepted for the University: ____________________________________________ _________________ Richard S. Podemski, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate School Date ! ACKNOWLEDGMENTS If not for the financial, academic, and moral support of dozens of people and research institutions, I could not have seen this project to completion. I would not have taken the first steps without financial support from Dr. Elizabeth Benchley and the UWF Archaeology Institute, the UWF Student Government Association. In addition, this project was supported by a grant from the University of West Florida through the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs. Their generous contributions afforded the opportunity to conduct my historical research in Spain. The trip was also possible through of the logistical support of Karen Mims. Her help at the Archaeology Institute was invaluable then and throughout my time at UWF. Thank you to my research companion, Danielle Dadiego.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Florida During the Mississippi Period
    2 ......... Southwest Florida during the Mississippi Period WILLIAM H. MARQUARDT AND KAREN J. WALKER This book focuses on the Mississippi period, ca. A.D. 1000 to 1500. In the archaeology of the southeastern United States, "Mississippian" generally means chiefdom-level societies that "practiced a maize-based agriculture, constructed (generally) platform mounds for elite residences and vari- ous corporate and public functions, and shared, to a considerable extent, a common suite of artifact types and styles, particularly in the realm of pottery (usually shell-tempered) and certain symbolic or prestige related artifacts" (Welch and Butler 2006: 2). Often implicit is an assumption that Mississippian chiefdoms represent the most complex cultural develop- ments in t he aboriginal southeastern United States. In southwest Florida, their contemporaries had no maize agriculture, constructed no platform mounds, and made a rather undistinguished pot- tery. Even so, Spaniards who encountered the historic Calusa in the six- teenth century observed a stratified society divided into nobles and com- moners, with hereditary leadership, tributary patronage-clientage that extended throughout south Florida, ritual and military specialists, far- ranging trade, an accomplished and expressive artistic tradition, complex religious beliefs and ritual practices, and effective subsistence practices that supported thousands of people and allowed a sedentary residence pattern (Fontaneda 1973; Hann 1991; Solis de Meras 1964). Furthermore, for nearly two centuries after contact, the Calusa maintained their identity and beliefs, effectively repulsing European attempts to conquer and con- vert them to Christianity, while many southeastern United States chief- doms were in cultural ruin within a few decades (Hann 1991). The Calusa heartland was in the coastal region encompassing Charlotte Harbor, Pine Island Sound, San Carlos Bay, and Estero Bay (figure 2.1).
    [Show full text]
  • Research Resumes on Useppa Island by Karen Walker and Bill Marquardt
    Friends of the Randell Research Center December 2012 • Vol. 11, No. 4 Research Resumes on Useppa Island by Karen Walker and Bill Marquardt In late November, we will return to Useppa Island to resume work in deposits that accumulated there about 3,000 years ago. This work is co-sponsored by the Florida Museum of Natural History’s Randell Research Center (RRC), the Useppa Island Historical Society, and the Useppa Inn and Dock Company. We are grateful to Tim Fitzsimmons and Garfi eld Beckstead of Useppa Island for providing the logistical assistance, lodging, and boat transportation that makes this work possible, and to David and Judy Nutting for permission to work on their property. This work will continue a project initiated in March, 2012, when Useppa residents joined with volunteers from the RRC and archaeologists from the Florida Museum to explore part of Useppa’s Southern Ridge (known locally as the “South Knoll”). One of the most common questions that Useppa passers- Excavations in Useppa’s Southern Ridge, March 2012. by asked us in March was, “Why are you digging at this Pictured (left to right) are John Turck, Ellen Turck, and Bill particular place?” Well, it is not the oldest deposit on Useppa, Marquardt. (Photo by K. Walker). nor are we fi nding extraordinary artifacts, but we do think the deposits left there by ancient Native Americans may help us fi ll in gaps in our understanding of climate changes and how to the people who lived on Calusa Ridge about 1,000 years the Indian people adapted to them.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Face of Commercial Fishing in Charlotte Harbor: Triumph of Ice Over Salt Theodore B
    The Changing Face of Commercial Fishing In Charlotte Harbor: Triumph of Ice over Salt Theodore B. VanItallie Harbor Habitat “Fishermen go where the fish are” and, by all accounts, the fish populations of Charlotte Harbor in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries were extraordinarily abundant. One of Florida's principal estuaries, the harbor in its pristine state must have provided an ideal habitat for many species of fish. The photic zone—a relatively thin layer of water that can be penetrated by light—is an ocean's primary production area. In the photic zone, growth rate depends on the intensity of light and the supply of available nutrients. When its waters are sufficiently clear and placid, Charlotte Harbor is shallow enough to permit transmission of abundant light to the phytoplankton (minute plant life) and to the sea grasses that provide a habitat favorable to fish. Three major rivers, the Myakka, Peace, and Caloosahatchee, flow into the estuarine system, delivering the nutrients needed to replace those used up by the harbor's teeming marine life. These freshwater streams also provide the zones of reduced salinity that some fish, especially juvenile forms, require. Unfortunately, fish-nursery conditions in Charlotte Harbor are not as favorable as they once were. Ecologists report that, overall, the Harbor's sea-grass meadows declined by about 29% between 1945 and 1982. A little more than half of this reduction was found in Pine Island Sound, Matlacha Pass, and San Carlos Bay. An adverse impact on the estuary's sea grass—probably transient— appears to have resulted from dredging associated with construction of the Intracoastal Waterway and the Sanibel Causeway.
    [Show full text]
  • Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Technical Report 16-3 Final 3/9/2017
    Identifying and Diagnosing Locations of Ongoing and Future Saltwater Wetland Loss: Mangrove Heart Attack Credit: Whitney Gray, 2011, Little Panther Key, Pine Island Sound Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Technical Report 16-3 Final 3/9/2017 326 West Marion Avenue Punta Gorda, Florida 33950 (941) 575-5090 www.CHNEP.org The Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program is a partnership of citizens, elected officials, resource managers and commercial and recreational resource users working to improve the water quality and ecological integrity of the greater Charlotte Harbor watershed. A cooperative decision-making process is used within the Program to address diverse resource management concerns in the 4,700-square-mile study area. Many of these partners also financially support the Program, which, in turn, affords the Program opportunities to fund projects. The entities that have financially supported the Program include the following: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Southwest Florida Water Management District South Florida Water Management District Florida Department of Environmental Protection Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Polk, Sarasota, Manatee, Lee, Charlotte, DeSoto, and Hardee Counties Cities and Towns of Sanibel, Cape Coral, Fort Myers, Punta Gorda, North Port, Venice, Fort Myers Beach, Winter Haven, Bonita Springs, and Estero. This publication was authored by: • Lisa B. Beever, Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program • James W. Beever III, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council • Roy R. “Robin” Lewis III, Coastal Resources Group, Inc. • Laura Flynn, Coastal Resources Group, Inc. • Terry Tattar, University of Massachusetts • Liz Donley, Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program • E.J. Neafsey, Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation Acknowledgement: The Charlotte Harbor Aquatic Preserves provided boat access, captains and expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Charlotte Harbor Estuarine Studi!;S
    CHARLOTTE HARBOR ESTUARINE STUDI!;S • DISTRIBUTION AND FLUCTUATIONS IN THE FISH FAUNA OF THE CHARLOTTE HARBOR ESTUARY, FLORIDA BY Johnson C. S. Wang Mote Marine Laboratory Sa rasota, Florida Edwa rd C. Raney Corn ell University Ithaca, New York 950 I Blind Pass Road Sarasota, Florida 33581 DISTRIBUTION AND FLUCTUATIONS IN THE·fISH FAUNA OF THE CHARLOTTE HARBOR ESTUARY, FLORIDA Sponsored by: The Mote Marine Laboratory Sarasota and Placida, Florida and Cornell University Ithaca, New York Principal Investigators: Wang, Johnson C. S., Ph.D. Raney, Edward C., Ph.D. Editorial Assistance with manuscript: Moores, Donald D. June, 1971 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the support glVen throughout this study by Dr. Perry W. Gilbert, the Director, and Mr. William R. Mote, the President of the Mote Marine Laboratory. Dr. Yoshie Dotsu, Mr. Martin Cole, Mr. John B. Heiser, Mr. Barry A. Smith, and Mr. Bruce A. Thompson assisted in the field collection. Dr. Charles M. Breder, Jr. made numerous helpful suggestions and assisted with some of the identifications during the course of the study. Miss Patricia Morrissey and Mrs. Katherine von Schmidt assisted in the preparation of this report. These studies were financed in part by grants to the Mote Marine Laboratory from the National Science Foundation for support of the R/V RHINCODON, the Theodore R. and Grayce W. Bartels Foundation and the Bauer Scientific Trust. II TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . .. 1 METHODS ................................. 1 WATER CONDITIONS .......................... 17 SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNT OF FISHES ................. 20 DISCUSSION ......................... ...... 49 SUMMARY ................................. 54 LITERATURE CITED .............. ............ 54 APPENDIX A (check list of fishes) .................. A-1 APPENDIX B (length-frequency distribution tables) .........B-1 III INTRODUCTION Charlotte Harbor is located on the Gulf coast of Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Charlotte Harbor Regional Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
    Charlotte Harbor Regional Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment The Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP) is a partnership of citizens, scientists, elected offi cials, resource managers and commercial and recreational resource users who are working to improve the water quality and ecological integrity of the CHNEP study area. A cooperative decision- making process is used within the program to address diverse resource management concerns in the 4,700-square-mile CHNEP study area. February 19, 2010 Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program March 2008 Policy Committee Mr. Tom Welborn, Co-Chair Mr. Jon Iglehart, Co-Chair Chief; Wetlands, Coastal, & Ocean Branch South District Director U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Florida Department of Environmental Protection CITIES COUNTIES AGENCIES Hon. Adrian Jackson Hon. Adam Cummings Ms. Patricia M. Steed City of Bartow Charlotte County Central Florida Regional Planning Council Hon. Richard Ferreira Vacant Dr. Philip Stevens City of Bonita Springs DeSoto County Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Ms. Connie Jarvis Vacant Ms. Sally McPherson City of Cape Coral Hardee County South Florida Water Management District Ms. Melanie R. Grigsby Hon. Ray Judah Hon. Don McCormick City of Fort Myers Lee County Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Hon. Herb Acken Hon. Carol Whitmore Brig. Gen. Rufus C. Lazzell (U.S. Army, ret.) Town of Fort Myers Beach Manatee County Southwest Florida Water Management District Hon. Tom Jones Mr. Jeffrey Spence City of North Port Polk County Hon. Charles Wallace Hon. Jon Thaxton City of Punta Gorda Sarasota County Hon. Mick Denham City of Sanibel Ms. Kathleen Weeden City of Venice Hon. Yvonne Brookes City of Winter Haven Management Committee Co-Chairs Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Models of Settlement for the Florida Gulf Coast
    Chapter 12 Developing Models of Settlement for the Florida Gulf Coast MICHAEL RUSSO AND IRVY R. QUITMYER One puzzle with which archaeologists struggle is determining when people began to be less mobile and more sedentary. In many parts of the world seden- tism is linked to plant domestication. Residential sedentism without domestic plants is less frequently reported. However, Calusa communities on the south- western Gulf coast of Florida in the 16th century A.D. exhibited many features considered hallmarks of sedentary societies: permanent structures, storage facil- ities, large villages, and large-scale public works in the form of shell and earthen mounds. The Calusa political system maintained hegemony over the entire southern tip of the peninsula (Widmer 1988). Although the Calusa lived in per- manently-occupied villages, domesticated plants were not a significant food source (Scarry and Newsom 1992). Instead, Calusa economies were based on the bountiful, non-domesticated plants and animals of Florida’s coastal estuaries, marshes, and swamps. When did this tradition of sedentism in the absence of a domestic food base appear and how was it supported? This study elaborates upon evidence for early sedentism on the southwestern Gulf coast of Florida and reveals two distinct patterns of bay scallop (Argopecten irradians) collection. EVIDENCE FOR SEASON OF USE Traditional markers of sedentism present difficulties for interpreting archaeolog- ical sites in southwestern Florida (Figure 12-1). “Permanent structures” made of leaves and branches degraded quickly and subterranean storage pits were less 235 236 MICHAEL RUSSO AND IRVY R. QUITMYER Figure 12-1. Archaeological and other locations in south Florida mentioned in text.
    [Show full text]
  • Calusa Newsnews Newsletter of the Southwest Florida Project Randell Research Center Florida M Useum of N Atural H Istory Number 10 • November 2001
    CALUSACALUSA NEWSNEWS NEWSLETTER OF THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PROJECT RANDELL RESEARCH CENTER FLORIDA M USEUM OF N ATURAL H ISTORY NUMBER 10 • NOVEMBER 2001 Teaching Pavilion to be Built at Pineland Stans Foundation Grant Paves Way for New Development Phase by William Marquardt THE STANS FOUNDATION has taken the receptions and musical entertainment. lead in helping the Randell Research A walking trail will also be con- Center develop its teaching and research structed. Attractive signs along the Top: Architect’s preliminary concept drawing of facilities. A grant of $105,000 from the trail will explain various aspects of open-air teaching pavilion for the RRC. Stans Foundation, plus $25,000 from Pineland’s 2000-year human past. (Drawing by Jeff Mudgett.) the Maple Hill Foundation, $10,000 The pavilion will be a major step from Michael Hansinger, and $1,000 forward for the Randell Center. Up to Bottom: Plan view of pavilion, activity area, from Bill Marquardt added up to now, there has been no place for visiting and restrooms. (Drawing by Jeff Mudgett.) $141,000. This was matched by the school children to go in case of inclem- State of Florida, for a total building ent weather except back to their bus. fund of $282,000. Construction begins Nor have we been able to offer our tion. The testing project was contin- in winter, 2002. guests a cool drink of water or a com- ued by our second annual summer Our teaching pavilion will provide a fortable place to watch a video or a archaeological field school, in coopera- covered, open-air learning space for up lecture.
    [Show full text]
  • Aboriginal Occupation of Gasparilla Island by Robert F
    Aboriginal Occupation of Gasparilla Island By Robert F. Edic Excerpted with permission from Maritime Archaeology of Lemon Bay, Florida, Florida Anthropological Society Publications, No. 14 (Spring 1999) In 1980 I moved to Gasparilla Island. By 1982 I had found an unrecorded aboriginal shell midden on land being cleared for house .construction. By 1989 I had discovered six additional aboriginal sites on Gasparilla Island, and two more on adjacent small islands, Hoagen and Sisters keys. Some of these sites date to c. A.D. 800 - 1500 and reveal that indigenous Florida Indians used Gasparilla Island more intensively than previously known. Environment At the end of the last Ice Age, about 20,000 years ago, the sea level was lower (approximately 200 feet) and Florida's Gulf coast was about 100 miles west of its present location. By 6,000 years ago, rising sea levels had started to inundate the area that is now Charlotte Harbor. Gasparilla Island is part of a chain of barrier islands at the mouth of Charlotte Harbor. The island is of recent origin. Radiocarbon dating of shells from beach-ridge deposits suggests the island is no more than approximately 3,000 years old. An isolated artifact - a chipped-stone projectile point or knife (Bolen Plain) made from fossil (silicified) coral -found on the beach by state park ranger Anne Marie Sampley, probably dates to ca. 7,000 B.C., well before the island formed. There is a general trend for erosion and shoreline recession along the western edge of Gasparilla Island, fronting the Gulf of Mexico. Archaeological sites are lacking there, and it is presumed that erosion has removed evidence of early sites that might have existed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bay of Pigs: Lessons Learned Topic: the Bay of Pigs Invasion
    The Bay of Pigs: Lessons Learned Topic: The Bay of Pigs Invasion Grade Level: 9-12 Subject Area: US History after World War II – History and Government Time Required: One class period Goals/Rationale: Students analyze President Kennedy’s April 20, 1961 speech to the American Society of Newspaper Editors in which he unapologetically frames the invasion as “useful lessons for us all to learn” with strong Cold War language. This analysis will help students better understand the Cold War context of the Bay of Pigs invasion, and evaluate how an effective speech can shift the focus from a failed action or policy towards a future goal. Essential Question: How can a public official address a failed policy or action in a positive way? Objectives Students will be able to: Explain the US rationale for the Bay of Pigs invasion and the various ways the mission failed. Analyze the tone and content of JFK’s April 20, 1961 speech. Evaluate the methods JFK used in this speech to present the invasion in a more positive light. Connection to Curricula (Standards): National English Language Standards (NCTE) 1 - Students read a wide range of print and non-print texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works. 3- Students apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts.
    [Show full text]
  • 3,000 Years Ago on Useppa Island David Nutting Funds New Research on Useppa’S Late Archaic
    Vol. 6, No. 1 March 2007 3,000 Years Ago on Useppa Island David Nutting Funds New Research on Useppa’s Late Archaic by Bill Marquardt With world-wide attention focused on the issue of global warming, there has never been a greater need for reliable knowledge about climate change. In mid-November, a construction project on Useppa Island provided an opportunity to study both the climate and the culture of Pine Island Sound some 3,000 years ago. 1 Located about 3 ⁄2 miles west of Pineland, Useppa has been studied periodi- cally by archaeologists since 1979. Several houses are to be built on the island by VIP Structures, and Lot III-17 was the first to be affected by heavy machinery. Specifically, some dirt was to be transferred from that lot and used elsewhere. A backhoe cut exposed shells and fish bones—the remnants of many fine seafood meals—as well as a few pieces of ancient pottery and shell tools. At the invitation of the owner, the Randell Research Center’s John Worth and Florida Public Archaeology Network archaeologist Kara Bridgman Sweeney, along with Bill Marquardt and visiting geoarchaeologist Julie Stein, studied the TOP – Visiting archaeologist Julie Stein (left) takes measurements archaeological deposits and removed samples for further analysis. while FPAN archaeologist Kara Bridgman Sweeney sketches the Back at the laboratory, Bill Marquardt and Karen Walker water-screened exposed midden. (Photo by B. Marquardt.) the samples and selected materials for further analysis and radiocarbon LEFT – UF undergraduate intern Lauren Garroway catalogs 3,000- dating. The dates indicate that people were on today’s Lot III-17 between year-old shell hammers from Useppa’s Lot III-17.
    [Show full text]