Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 79/Tuesday, April 27, 2021/Notices

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 79/Tuesday, April 27, 2021/Notices 22258 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 27, 2021 / Notices members of the Pawnee Nation of burials but without any further DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oklahoma. attributions. Human skeletal remains In 1940, 321 cultural items were and associated funerary objects from National Park Service removed from cemeteries associated this site were repatriated to the Pawnee [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–NPS0031769; with the Clarks site (25PK1) in Polk Nation of Oklahoma in 1990–1991. The PPWOCRADN0–PCU00RP14.R50000] County, NE. These objects were four unassociated funerary objects are recovered during archeological three soil samples and one flintlock Notice of Inventory Completion: excavations by the Nebraska State rifle. Valentine Museum, Richmond, VA Historical Society. The 321 objects are listed as having been recovered from This village was occupied by the AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. burials but without any further Kitkahaki Band of the Pawnee from ACTION: Notice. attributions. Human skeletal remains about 1775 to 1809, based on and associated funerary objects from archeological and ethnohistorical SUMMARY: The Valentine Museum has this site were repatriated to the Pawnee information, as well as oral traditional completed an inventory of human Nation of Oklahoma in 1990–1991. The information provided by members of the remains and associated funerary objects, 321 unassociated funerary objects are: Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma. in consultation with the appropriate 15 brass/copper bells, one brass/copper Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian ornament, one bridle bit, two bullet Determinations Made by History organizations, and has determined that molds, five chalk fragments, four Nebraska there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary chipped stone flakes, five chipped stone Officials of History Nebraska have tools, two clasp knives, three clay objects and present-day Indian Tribes or determined that: lumps, three cloth and leather Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal fragments, 14 cobbles/pebbles, one • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), descendants or representatives of any metal/fabric coil, one cradle board, 15 the 694 cultural items described above Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian earbob/tinkling cones, 18 English are reasonably believed to have been organization not identified in this notice gunflints, one fossil antler, 32 scrap placed with or near individual human that wish to request transfer of control metal fragments, one fringed leather remains at the time of death or later as of these human remains and associated fragment, three gun parts, one iron axe part of the death rite or ceremony and funerary objects should submit a written head, one iron ball, three iron files, one are believed, by a preponderance of the request to the Valentine Museum. If no iron fixture, one iron hoe, one iron evidence, to have been removed from a additional requestors come forward, projectile point, three iron rings, one specific burial site of a Native American transfer of control of the human remains kettle fragment, one large brass ring, two individual. and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or lead arrow points, nine leather straps, • three metal bells, five metal buttons, one Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there Native Hawaiian organizations stated in metal disk with cloth, one metal is a relationship of shared group this notice may proceed. ornament, seven metal rings, two metal identity that can be reasonably traced DATES: Lineal descendants or tubes, one lead musket ball, three between the unassociated funerary representatives of any Indian Tribe or mussel shells, one nail, 63 ochre/ objects and the Pawnee Nation of Native Hawaiian organization not pigment fragments, two pipestone pipes, Oklahoma. identified in this notice that wish to one pocket knife, one pronghorn toe Additional Requestors and Disposition request transfer of control of these bone, one raptor wing bone, one reed human remains and associated funerary matting fragment, 22 reed fragments, 17 Lineal descendants or representatives objects should submit a written request sandstone abraders, one sandstone pipe, of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian with information in support of the one sheet brass/copper fragment, one organization not identified in this notice request to the Valentine Museum at the shell bead, three tinkling cones, one that wish to claim these cultural items address in this notice by May 27, 2021. vegetal fragment, six vegetal pieces with should submit a written request with ADDRESSES: Alicia Starliper, Collection adhering leather fragments, one white information in support of the claim to Project Manager/Registrar, The clay pipestem, 15 white clay pipestem Rob Bozell, History Nebraska, 5050 N Valentine Museum, 1015 E Clay Street, beads, one wood fragment with Richmond, VA 23219, telephone (804) adhering leather, six wood fragments, 32nd Street, Lincoln, NE 68504, telephone (402) 525–1624, email 649–0711 Ext. 329, email astarliper@ one wooden bow segment, and one thevalentine.org. wooden bowl with cloth. [email protected], by May 27, The Clarks site was occupied by the 2021. After that date, if no additional SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Pawnee (mostly the Grand Band) from claimants have come forward, transfer here given in accordance with the 1823–1849. The Clarks site is clearly of control of the unassociated funerary Native American Graves Protection and associated with the Pawnee Nation of objects to the Pawnee Nation of Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. Oklahoma, based on archeological and Oklahoma may proceed. 3003, of the completion of an inventory ethnohistorical information, as well as History Nebraska is responsible for of human remains and associated oral traditional information provided by notifying the Pawnee Nation of funerary objects under the control of the Valentine Museum, Richmond, VA. The members of the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma that this notice has been Oklahoma. human remains and associated funerary published. In 1941, four cultural items were objects were removed from Bell Mound removed from cemeteries associated Dated: April 19, 2021. #2, also known as Chief’s Mound, in with the Pike Pawnee site (25WT1) in Melanie O’Brien, Rockbridge County, VA. Webster County, NE. These objects were Manager, National NAGPRA Program. This notice is published as part of the recovered during archeological [FR Doc. 2021–08770 Filed 4–26–21; 8:45 am] National Park Service’s administrative excavations by the Nebraska State responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 Historical Society. The four objects are BILLING CODE 4312–52–P U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in listed as having been recovered from this notice are the sole responsibility of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:52 Apr 26, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27APN1.SGM 27APN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 27, 2021 / Notices 22259 the museum, institution, or Federal mound on the property of John Marshall placed with or near individual human agency that has control of the Native Bell, Esq. (1815—1890), which was remains at the time of death or later as American human remains and situated on the forks of Cow-Pasture and part of the death rite or ceremony. associated funerary objects. The Calf-Pasture Rivers in Rockbridge • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there National Park Service is not responsible County, VA. The mound was located is a relationship of shared group for the determinations in this notice. approximately 150 yards west of the identity that can be reasonably traced farmhouse. The author of the story is between the Native American human Consultation presumed to be Mann S. Valentine II remains and associated funerary objects A detailed assessment of the human (accompanied by his son Granville G. and the Monacan Indian Nation. remains was made by the Valentine Valentine), who procured laborers at his Additional Requestors and Disposition Museum professional staff. The expense to excavate the mound for a Chickahominy Indian Tribe; personal collection. The contents of the Lineal descendants or representatives Chickahominy Indian Tribe—Eastern mound are described in detail and of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian Division; Eastern Band of Cherokee match the information provided on the organization not identified in this notice Indians; Monacan Indian Nation; exhibition label discovered during the that wish to request transfer of control Nansemond Indian Nation [previously inventory. Debra Gould, author of of these human remains and associated listed as Nansemond Indian Tribe]; ‘‘Bioarcheology of Virginia Burial funerary objects should submit a written Pamunkey Indian Tribe; Upper Mounds,’’ has noted that in August request with information in support of Mattaponi Tribe; and as well as four 1877, Mann S. Valentine II and his son the request to Alicia Starliper, non-federally recognized Indian Granville excavated two mounds in Collection Project Manager/Registrar, groups—the Cheroenhaka (Nottoway) Rockbridge County, VA, which are The Valentine Museum, 1015 E Clay Indian Tribe; Mattaponi Nation; known today as Bell Mound #1 and Bell Street, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone Nottoway Indian Tribe of Virginia; and Mound #2. According to C. G. Holland, (804) 649–0711 Ext. 329, email the Patawomeck Indian Tribe of author of the article ‘‘Preceramic and [email protected], by May 27, Virginia—were contacted by Valentine Ceramic Cultural Patterns in Northwest 2021. After that date, if no additional Museum, but no in-person consultation Virginia,’’ Chief’s Mound and Bell requestors have come forward, transfer was requested. Hereafter, all the above Mound #2 are one in the same. No of control of the human remains and entities are referred to as ‘‘The Tribes known individual was identified. The associated funerary objects to the and Groups.’’ three associated funerary objects are one Monacan Indian Nation may proceed. History and Description of the Remains partial vessel, one clear quartz crystal, The Valentine Museum is responsible and one worked copper object.
Recommended publications
  • Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds
    Defining the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for The Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds Prepared By: Scott M. Strickland Virginia R. Busby Julia A. King With Contributions From: Francis Gray • Diana Harley • Mervin Savoy • Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland Mark Tayac • Piscataway Indian Nation Joan Watson • Piscataway Conoy Confederacy and Subtribes Rico Newman • Barry Wilson • Choptico Band of Piscataway Indians Hope Butler • Cedarville Band of Piscataway Indians Prepared For: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Annapolis, Maryland St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland November 2015 ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this project was to identify and represent the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for the Nanjemoy and Mattawoman creek watersheds on the north shore of the Potomac River in Charles and Prince George’s counties, Maryland. The project was undertaken as an initiative of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay office, which supports and manages the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail. One of the goals of the Captain John Smith Trail is to interpret Native life in the Middle Atlantic in the early years of colonization by Europeans. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept, developed as an important tool for identifying Native landscapes, has been incorporated into the Smith Trail’s Comprehensive Management Plan in an effort to identify Native communities along the trail as they existed in the early17th century and as they exist today. Identifying ICLs along the Smith Trail serves land and cultural conservation, education, historic preservation, and economic development goals. Identifying ICLs empowers descendant indigenous communities to participate fully in achieving these goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Finding
    This page is intentionally left blank. Pamunkey Indian Tribe (Petitioner #323) Proposed Finding Proposed Finding The Pamunkey Indian Tribe (Petitioner #323) TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1 Regulatory Procedures .............................................................................................1 Administrative History.............................................................................................2 The Historical Indian Tribe ......................................................................................4 CONCLUSIONS UNDER THE CRITERIA (25 CFR 83.7) ..............................................9 Criterion 83.7(a) .....................................................................................................11 Criterion 83.7(b) ....................................................................................................21 Criterion 83.7(c) .....................................................................................................57 Criterion 83.7(d) ...................................................................................................81 Criterion 83.7(e) ....................................................................................................87 Criterion 83.7(f) ...................................................................................................107
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Interim Evaluation of Virginia's 2016-2017 Milestones
    Interim Evaluation of Virginia’s 2016-2017 Milestones Progress June 30, 2017 EPA INTERIM EVALUATION OF VIRGINIA’s 2016-2017 MILESTONES As part of its role in the accountability framework, described in the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (Bay TMDL) for nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing this interim evaluation of Virginia’s progress toward meeting its statewide and sector-specific two-year milestones for the 2016-2017 milestone period. In 2018, EPA will evaluate whether each Bay jurisdiction achieved the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) partnership goal of practices in place by 2017 that would achieve 60 percent of the nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment reductions necessary to achieve applicable water quality standards in the Bay compared to 2009. Load Reduction Review When evaluating 2016-2017 milestone implementation, EPA is comparing progress to expected pollutant reduction targets to assess whether statewide and sector load reductions are on track to have practices in place by 2017 that will achieve 60 percent of necessary reductions compared to 2009. This is important to understand sector progress as jurisdictions develop the Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans (WIP). Loads in this evaluation are simulated using version 5.3.2 of the CBP partnership Watershed Model and wastewater discharge data reported by the Bay jurisdictions. According to the data provided by Virginia for the 2016 progress run, Virginia is on track to achieve its statewide 2017 targets for nitrogen and phosphorus but is off track to meet its statewide targets for sediment. The data also show that, at the sector scale, Virginia is off track to meet its 2017 targets for nitrogen reductions in the Agriculture, Urban/Suburban Stormwater and Septic sectors and is also off track for phosphorus in the Urban/Suburban Stormwater sector, and off track for sediment in the Agriculture and Urban/Suburban Stormwater sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • American Indians of the Chesapeake Bay: an Introduction
    AMERICAN INDIANS OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY: AN INTRODUCTION hen Captain John Smith sailed up the Chesapeake Bay in 1608, American Indians had W already lived in the area for thousands of years. The people lived off the land by harvesting the natural resources the Bay had to offer. In the spring, thousands of shad, herring and rockfish were netted as they entered the Chesapeake’s rivers and streams to spawn. Summer months were spent tending gardens that produced corn, beans and squash. In the fall, nuts such as acorns, chestnuts and walnuts were gathered from the forest floor. Oysters and clams provided another source of food and were easily gathered from the water at low tide. Hunting parties were sent overland in search of deer, bear, wild turkey and other land animals. Nearby marshes provided wild rice and tuckahoe (arrow arum), which produced a potato-like root. With so much food available, the American Indians of the Chesapeake region were able to thrive. Indian towns were found close to the water’s edge near freshwater springs or streams. Homes were made out of bent saplings (young, Captain John Smith and his exploring party encounter two Indian men green trees) that were tied into a spearing fish in the shallows on the lower Eastern Shore. The Indians framework and covered with woven later led Smith to the village of Accomack, where he met with the chief. mats, tree bark, or animal skins. Villages often had many homes clustered together, and some were built within a palisade, a tall wall built with sturdy sticks and covered with bark, for defense.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Americans in Our Area
    Early Native Americans In Our Area Written & Published by the Waynesboro Historical Commission Founded 1971 Waynesboro, Virginia 22980 Dedication The Historic Commission of Waynesboro dedicates this publication to the earliest settlers of the North American Continent and in particular Virginia and our immediate region. Their relentless push through an unmarked environment exemplifies the quest of the human spirit to reach the horizon and make it its own. Until relatively recently, a history of America would devote a slight section to the Indian tribes discovered by the colonists who landed on the North American continent. The subsequent text would detail the claiming of the land, the creation of towns and villages, and the conquering of the forces that would halt the relentless move to the West. That view of history has been challenged by the work of archeologists who have used the advances in science and the skills of excavation to reveal a past that had been forgotten or deliberatively ignored. This publication seeks to present a concise chronicle of the prehistory of our country and our region with attention to one of the forgotten and marginalized civilizations, the Monacans who existed and prospered in Central Virginia and the areas immediate to Waynesboro. Migration to North America Well before the Romans, the Greeks, or the Egyptians created the culture we call Western Civilization, an ethnic group known as the “First People” began its colonization of the North American continent. There are a number of theories of how the original settlers came to the continent. Some thought they were the “Lost Tribes” of the Old Testament.
    [Show full text]
  • The First People of Virginia a Social Studies Resource Unit for K-6 Students
    The First People of Virginia A Social Studies Resource Unit for K-6 Students Image: Arrival of Englishmen in Virginia from Thomas Harriot, A Brief and True Report, 1590 Submitted as Partial Requirement for EDUC 405/ CRIN L05 Elementary Social Studies Curriculum and Instruction Professor Gail McEachron Prepared By: Lauren Medina: http://lemedina.wmwikis.net/ Meagan Taylor: http://mltaylor01.wmwikis.net Julia Vans: http://jcvans.wmwikis.net Historical narrative: All group members Lesson One- Map/Globe skills: All group members Lesson Two- Critical Thinking and The Arts: Julia Vans Lesson Three-Civic Engagement: Meagan Taylor Lesson Four-Global Inquiry: Lauren Medina Artifact One: Lauren Medina Artifact Two: Meagan Taylor Artifact Three: Julia Vans Artifact Four: Meagan Taylor Assessments: All group members 2 The First People of Virginia Introduction The history of Native Americans prior to European contact is often ignored in K-6 curriculums, and the narratives transmitted in schools regarding early Native Americans interactions with Europeans are often biased towards a Euro-centric perspective. It is important, however, for students to understand that American History did not begin with European exploration. Rather, European settlement in North America must be contextualized within the framework of the pre-existing Native American civilizations they encountered upon their arrival. Studying Native Americans and their interactions with Europeans and each other prior to 1619 aligns well with National Standards for History as well as Virginia Standards of Learning (SOLs), which dictate that students should gain an understanding of diverse historical origins of the people of Virginia. There are standards in every elementary grade level that are applicable to this topic of study including Virginia SOLs K.1, K.4, 1.7, 1.12, 2.4, 3.3, VS.2d, VS.2e, VS.2f and WHII.4 (see Appendix A).
    [Show full text]
  • STANDARD VS.2G
    Attachment A, Memo No. 014-13 January 18, 2013 STANDARD VS.2g The student will demonstrate knowledge of the physical geography and native peoples, past and present, of Virginia by g) identifying and locating the current state-recognized tribes. Essential Understandings Essential Questions Essential Knowledge Essential Skills American Indian people have lived in What are the names of the current American Indians, who trace their Draw conclusions and make Virginia for thousands of years. state-recognized tribes? family histories back to well before generalizations. (VS.1d) 1607, continue to live in all parts of Today, eleven† American Indian tribes Where are the current state-recognized Virginia today. Interpret ideas and events from in Virginia are recognized by the tribes located in Virginia today? different historical perspectives. Commonwealth of Virginia. The current state-recognized tribes (VS.1g) are located in the following regions: Coastal Plain (Tidewater) region: Analyze and interpret maps to explain – Cheroenhaka (Nottoway) Tribe† relationships among landforms, water – Chickahominy Tribe features, climatic characteristics, and – Eastern Chickahominy Tribe historical events. (VS.1i) – Mattaponi Tribe – Nansemond Tribe Pronunciation guide: – Nottoway Tribe† Cheroenhaka (Nottoway): Chair-oh- – Pamunkey Tribe en-HAH-kah (NAH-toh-way)† – Patawomeck Tribe† Chickahominy: CHICK-a-HOM-a-nee – Rappahannock Tribe Mattaponi: ma-ta-po-NYE – Upper Mattaponi Tribe Nansemond: NAN-sa-mund Piedmont region: Nottoway: NAH-toh-way† – Monacan Tribe Pamunkey: pa-MUN-kee Patawomeck: Pət- OW-ə-meck† Rappahannock: RAP-a-HAN-nock Monacan: MON-a-cun (The pronunciation guide for these words will not be assessed on the test.) †Revised January 2013 These technical edits will not affect the Virginia Studies Standards of Learning test at this time.
    [Show full text]
  • James River by Anadromous Fishes
    USE OF OF LOWER TRIBUTARIES THE JAMES ANADROMOUS RIVER FISHES BY Iq•chae1 Odom C. R¢chard J. Neves John Ney J. Mudr, John I•I. e H•ZdZ•e and Sciences Depar•men• F•sher•es o• University V•,rg•n•a Znst•tute PoZytechn•c and State V•rg•n•a BZacksburg, USE TRIBUTARIES OF THE OF LOWER JAMES RIVER BY ANADROMOUS FISHES Final Report for Analysis Phase of Impediments Two the of an Spawning Migrations to of Virginia Anadromous Fish in Rivers by: Prepared Michael Odom C. Richard J. Neves Ney John J. John Mudre M. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences Virginia Polytechnic University Institute and State Blacksburg, Virginia 2•061 by: Sponsored Virginia Highway Research Council Virginia Highways Department Transportation of and August, 1986 ABSTRACT The tributaries of (downstream lower of the River James use Virginia) Richmond, by striped of bass, shad, American alewife, herring blueback and by reviewing determined was literature, consulting knowledgeable personnel, and agency interviewing local fishermen landowners. and Barriers to upstream tributary, identified for each movement and were highway all crossings impact evaluated their for were on spawning migrations. Striped and bass American shad spawn primarily spawning in the River but James proper, some apparently Chickahominy species in the River. Both occurs only River, ascend Appomattox the but American shad are known preference it. in of their to Because to spawn spawn large tributaries, usually in bridged, highway which are crossings impede do striped either bass not to appear or drainage. American shad in the River James (collectively herring Alewife blueback and known as herring) river ascend and in tributaries that most spawn empty into the River upstream (the James River of Mile 40 Virginia), Scotland, provided of they town have free access adequate depth.
    [Show full text]
  • Reports Which Would Describe the Condi- Routes 30 and 360 in the Upper Portion of the County
    King William County Shoreline Situation Report Supported by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program, and the Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program at the Depart- ment of Environmental Quality through Grant # NA770Z0204 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Manage- ment, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. Prepared By (in alphabetical order): Marcia Berman Harry Berquist Sharon Dewing Julie Glover Carl Hershner Tamia Rudnicky Dan Schatt Kevin Skunda Project Supervisors: Marcia Berman - Director, Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program Carl Hershner - Director, Center for Coastal Resources Management Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 367 of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science January, 2001 Cover Design by Harold Burrell, photo by Dwight Dyke. CHAPTER I - Introduction 1.1 Background systems within the county, and the drainage areas of both extend well beyond 1.4 Report Organization the county limits. A number of small creeks and tributaries feed the larger rivers. This report is divided into several sections. Chapter 2 describes meth- In the 1970s, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) received a King William is rural in character, with more than two-thirds of its land ods used to develop this inventory, along with conditions and attributes consid- grant through the National Science Foundation’s Research Applied to National area covered with forest vegetation. Development is most prevalent along ered in the survey. Chapter 3 identifies potential applications for the data, with Needs Program to develop a series of reports which would describe the condi- routes 30 and 360 in the upper portion of the county.
    [Show full text]
  • Untitled Typescript}, Macclenny Papers
    TABLE OF CONTENTS MAP OF SURVEY AREA SURVEY METHODOLOGY 1 HISTORIC CONTEXT OF SURVEY AREA 5 Physical Characteristics 5 Colonial Period 6 The Federal Period and the Nineteenth Century 24 The Twentieth Century 38 HISTORIC THEMES 46 Residential and Domestic Architecture Agriculture Government, Law and Welfare Education Military Religion Social and Cultural Transportation Commerce Industry, Manufacturing and Crafts THREATS TO HISTORIC RESOURCES 94 RECOMMENDATIONS 95 SOURCES 97 APPENDICES: INDEXES TO SURVEY SITES 101 Numerical Listing Alphabetical Listing SURVEY METHODOLOGY In May 1989 the City of Suffolk contracted with Frazier Associates of Staunton, Virginia to conduct a reconnaissance level architectural survey of 260 historic resources in the southern section of the City. This survey was funded in part by a grant from the National Park Service of the U. S. Department of the Interior through the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. The City of Suffolk is located within the Lower Tidewater Region, one of the geographic areas of the state which the Virginia Department of Historic Resources has created as a part of their State Preservation Plan. / This survey area is approximately 317.42 square miles and corresponds to the southern section of the former Nansemond County. It includes portions of the U. S. G. S. quad maps of Buckhorn, Corapeake, Franklin, Gates, Holland, Riverdale, Suffolk, Whaleyville, and Windsor. Parts of the quads of Lake Drumrnond and Lake Drurnmond N. W. are also in the survey - area butwere not included in tabulations since all of this area is in the Dismal Swamp and contains no historic resources to survey. The detailed boundary of the survey area extends from the City boundary with Isle of Wight County at U.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape
    Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape Prepared by: Scott M. Strickland Julia A. King Martha McCartney with contributions from: The Pamunkey Indian Tribe The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Prepared for: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay & Colonial National Historical Park The Chesapeake Conservancy Annapolis, Maryland The Pamunkey Indian Tribe Pamunkey Reservation, King William, Virginia The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe Adamstown, King William, Virginia The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Mattaponi Reservation, King William, Virginia St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland October 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of its management of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail, the National Park Service (NPS) commissioned this project in an effort to identify and represent the York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape. The work was undertaken by St. Mary’s College of Maryland in close coordination with NPS. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept represents “the context of the American Indian peoples in the Chesapeake Bay and their interaction with the landscape.” Identifying ICLs is important for raising public awareness about the many tribal communities that have lived in the Chesapeake Bay region for thousands of years and continue to live in their ancestral homeland. ICLs are important for land conservation, public access to, and preservation of the Chesapeake Bay. The three tribes, including the state- and Federally-recognized Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes and the state-recognized Mattaponi tribe, who are today centered in their ancestral homeland in the Pamunkey and Mattaponi river watersheds, were engaged as part of this project. The Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes participated in meetings and driving tours.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembering the River: Traditional Fishery Practices, Environmental Change and Sovereignty on the Pamunkey Indian Reservation
    W&M ScholarWorks Undergraduate Honors Theses Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 5-2019 Remembering the River: Traditional Fishery Practices, Environmental Change and Sovereignty on the Pamunkey Indian Reservation Alexis Jenkins Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses Part of the Indigenous Studies Commons Recommended Citation Jenkins, Alexis, "Remembering the River: Traditional Fishery Practices, Environmental Change and Sovereignty on the Pamunkey Indian Reservation" (2019). Undergraduate Honors Theses. Paper 1423. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses/1423 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Acknowledgements I would like to thank the Pamunkey Chief and Tribal Council for their support of this project, as well as the Pamunkey community members who shared their knowledge and perspectives with this researcher. I am incredibly honored to have worked under the guidance of Dr. Danielle Moretti-Langholtz, who has been a dedicated and inspiring mentor from the beginning. I also thank Dr. Ashley Atkins Spivey for her assistance as Pamunkey Tribal Liaison and for her review of my thesis as a member of the committee and am further thankful for the comments of committee members Dr. Martin Gallivan and Dr. Andrew Fisher, who provided valuable insight during the process. I would like to express my appreciation to the VIMS scientists who allowed me to volunteer with their lab and to the The Roy R.
    [Show full text]