Deciding the uture of the Past: The Miami Circle and Archaeological Preservation by Richard L. Stroup Professor of Economics, Montana State University Senior Associate, Political Economy Research Center Research Associate, The James Madison Institute and Matthew Brown Research Associate, Political Economy Research Center Research Associate, The James Madison Institute Policy Report #26 July 2000 The James Madison Institute 2017 Delta Blvd., Suite 102 P. O. Box 37460 Tallahassee, FL, 32315 Voice (850) 386-3131 Fax (850) 386-1807 E-mail [email protected] Website http://jamesmadison.org This Backgrounder was published by The James Madison Institute. Permission is granted to quote from this publication with appropriate acknowledgment. Deciding the Future of the Past: The Miami Circle and Archaeological Preservation Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................1 1. Introduction ...............................................................................................3 2. The Miami Circle Challenge .....................................................................3 County and City Involvement ..............................................................5 A Resolution to the Challenge .............................................................6 3. Modern Archaeology.................................................................................6 Funding for Archaeological Research .................................................7 The Problem of Looting .......................................................................8 Economic Growth and Archaeology: A Blessing or a Curse? ............9 Private and Public Archaeology..........................................................10 4. Drawbacks of the Current Approach.......................................................12 The Cost of Archaeological Regulation.............................................12 Supply-Side Problems ........................................................................13 The Chilling Effect.............................................................................14 Political versus Voluntary Solutions...................................................15 5. A Better Way: Improved Institutional Arrangements in Archaeology.... 17 Using Market Incentives to Preserve Natural Resources ..................17 Using Markets for Archaeological Preservation................................18 Preventing Looting.............................................................................20 Ensuring Diversity in Archaeology ...................................................20 Developing a Registry of Artifacts ....................................................21 6. Conclusion ...............................................................................................21 i James Madison Institute Policy Report No. 26 July 2000 1. Introduction approach, which forces developers and Both the city of Miami, Florida, and sur- landowners to pay for archaeological work rounding Miami-Dade County strongly and to halt projects in order to accommodate enforce historic preservation ordinances to archaeology, all without compensation. The prevent destruction of archaeological sites in incentives that result do not encourage their districts. Codes are in place requiring voluntary cooperation or preservation. At the any excavator, including a developer, to hire same time, they often may make the devel- an archaeologist to oversee the excavation of opment less attractive to investors. a potentially valuable site and to halt con- The fourth section recommends changes struction of the project, if necessary, to to reduce the limitations and the disadvan- conduct an archaeological dig. The excava- tages of both current archaeological prac- tor or developer must pay for both the ar- tices and the current legal environment, and chaeological oversight and any subsequent changes that would lead to greater gains investigations. from archaeological research. These local ordinances are popular with Archaeology does not have to conflict individuals who value the opportunity to with the interest of landowners who seek the learn from archaeological sites. While the highest value and best use of their property. local ordinances are usually straightforward With the proper incentives and institutional and have been helpful in bringing about arrangements, the goals of owners, develop- research and conservation in some situa- ers, collectors, and archaeologists should tions, they are not getting the whole job seldom be in serious or acrimonious conflict. done. This Backgrounder explains their limitations and disadvantages, and recom- 2. The Miami Circle Challenge mends changes that would lead to better “Centuries or millennia after its creation, the protection of the property interests and formation still seems sacred, partly because development rights of individuals. of its apparent function as a temple or astro- The report first narrates the events fol- nomical device, partly because it has sur- lowing the discovery of the Miami Circle in vived for so long, partly because it sits in the downtown Miami. The controversy sur- middle of a busy, modern megalopolis,” rounding that site and the apparent conflicts reported the Miami Herald.1 Since this story between builders and archaeologists and broke in January 1999, the formation now between the city and county governments known universally as the Miami Circle has highlight the problems of existing regula- generated unprecedented popular interest in tions. archaeology and in the often-neglected The second section gives an overview of history of American Indians. There has been modern archaeology. It describes the strong a contentious debate about what will be done desire of archaeologists, historians, and with the Circle. Solutions ranged from others to conserve elements of our human digging up the stone formation and moving past and thereby to learn more from them. It it to another site for display, to keeping it also describes the sometimes-conflicting intact at its current location as the center of goals of archaeology and economic develop- an archaeological preserve. ment. Despite the important archaeological The third section points out the draw- information that the Miami Circle may backs of the current “command-and-control” contain, its fate has largely been decided in 3 James Madison Institute Policy Report No. 26 July 2000 the political arena. Almost from the start, the trained eye. The 38-foot wide circle, formed combination of media attention and public by a series of 24 holes of various shapes dug interest created the kind of setting that into the limestone bedrock, is clear to a attracts political intervention. Representa- casual observer. The pattern is overlaid with tives from local, state, and federal govern- a series of 200 smaller holes that appear to ment have all weighed in with proposals to have no obvious pattern, and these are save the site. scattered both inside and outside the Circle. When developer Michael Baumann The scene is further confused by the pres- bought the 2.2 acres on the south bank of the ence of a rectangular concrete septic tank Miami River at the point where it empties that appears to be perfectly aligned with the into Biscayne Bay, it was home to a rather Circle. unassuming 1950s-era apartment complex Archaeologists specialize in seeing clearly beginning to show its age. While the things that a layperson overlooks in the property and its hidden treasures remained physical record of the past, and they found unchanged for decades, the surrounding area the site much more intriguing. While the had been turned into expensive real estate. developer awaited permission to resume the With neighbors that include the Sheraton project, archaeologists John Ricisak, the Biscayne Bay Hotel and the Dupont Plaza field director of the dig, and his supervisor, Hotel, it seemed a logical location for the Robert Carr, then director of Miami-Dade upscale project Baumann and his team had County’s Historic Preservation Division, in mind. saw what appeared to be the foundation of The $8 million waterfront property was an ancient structure dug into the limestone to become Brickell Pointe, a commercial buried three feet below the surface. When development that would also include twin the public got news of the discovery, theo- towers housing 600 apartments. Estimates of ries about the origin of the Circle—some of the value of the completed project ranged them very unconventional—began to spread from $90 to $126 million. But progress was through newspapers, radio programs, and the halted when, after clearing the land, an Internet. archaeological find brought unprecedented The fact that ax blades made from mate- media exposure. rial not found in Florida were discovered at While rapidly growing South Florida, the site led some to hypothesize that the and especially Miami, sometimes appear to Circle was the first solid evidence that be bent on development at all costs, Miami- Central America’s ancient Maya civilization Dade County and the City of Miami passed had reached the state in pre-Columbian ordinances in the early 1980s to help pre- times. Others saw the Circle as the founda- serve archaeological sites and artifacts. The tion of an ancient solar calendar, an Ameri- regulations require archaeological concerns can Stonehenge. Still others went so far as to to be considered before building permits are label it the site of ancient