DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING & BUILDING INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners VIA: Terry L. Shannon /1.'M VIA: Thomas Barnett VIA: Mary Beth Cook km e. FROM: Kirsti Uunila DATE: May 26, 2015 SUBJECT: Certified Local Government Grant for Underrepresented Communities
Background: The National Park Service has made grant funds available to Certified Local Governments (CLGs) for projects focused on underrepresented communities. This grant program requires no matching funds. As a CLG, Calvert County is eligible. Dr. Julie King, Professor of Anthropology at St. Mary's College of Southern Maryland proposed a collaborative project to excavate, research, and nominate significant Piscataway Indian sites to the National Register. One of the sites requiring further excavation is on the Biscoe Gray Heritage Farm. No American Indian sites have been formally recognized by a National Register listing in Calvert County.
Discussion: Dr. King has written the grant for the project to the National Park Service with some assistance from the Historic Preservation Planner, who will also contribute 35 hours of staff time to logistics and field work. The Natural Resources Chief will contribute on-site support services as needed from her budget. Dr. King, her associate, and student will perform the fieldwork and all the necessary laboratory analysis, report writing, and the preparation of the National Register nomination which will include archaeological sites in Calvert, St. Mary's, Charles, and Prince Georges Counties. The Historic District Commissions in these counties have written letters of support.
Listing on the National Register of Historic Places is not regulatory, but instead helps draw national attention to these important sites and the history they represent in our region. The fieldwork and background investigation that is necessary to complete the project will add to our understanding of the landscape and the people who shaped it before the arrival of Europeans in the 1600s. This, in turn, will permit us to enrich our interpretation of the landscape and the site at Biscoe Gray Heritage Farm.
Conclusion/Recommendations: 1. Please affirm the grant application. 2. Please sign the attached letter of support.
Fiscal Impact: Cash match consists of staff salary (Historic Preservation Planner). No additional funds are requested for this project from Calvert County. Attachment: Grants.gov application; Project Statement C: Rachel Griffith Julia King Karyn Molines CALVERT COUNTY Board of Commissioners BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Mike Hart Courthouse, 175 Main Street Thin Ilejl Prince Frederick, Maryland 20678 Pat Nutter 410-535-1600 • 301-855-1243 Evan K. Slaughenhoupt Jr. www.eo.eal.md.us Steven R. Weems
June 9, 2015
Mr. Hampton Tucker, Chief Historic Preservation Grant Division National Park Service 1201 Eye Street, NW (2256) Washington, DC 20005
Dear Mr. Tucker:
We are pleased to support the project to prepare a multiple-property National Register nomination for Piscataway Landscapes. The project will involve further investigation of a significant Late Woodland Period site at one of our County properties, the Biscoe Gray Heritage Farm. We look forward to learning the results of the study and being able to use that information to enrich our interpretation of the changing human and natural landscapes at the property.
The Calvert County Board of County Commissioners is also grateful for this opportunity to collaborate with our neighboring counties, with whom we share so much heritage. We urge you to give strongest consideration to this application.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CALVERT COUNTY, MARYLAND
Steven R. Weems, President
Evan K. Slaughenhoupt Jr., Vice President
Mike Hart
Tom Hejl
Pat Nutter
Maryland Relay for Impaired Hearing or Speech: 1-800-735-2258
c GRANTS.GOV' Grant Application Package
Opportunity Title: Historic Preservation Fund Grants to Underrepresented C Offering Agency: National Park Service CFDA Number: 15.904 CFDA Description: Historic Preservation Fund Grants-In-Aid ,-- Opportunity Number: Pl5AS00078 Competition ID: Opportunity Open Date: Opportunity Close Date: 06/15/2015 Agency Contact: Hampton Tucker chief preservation grants E-mail: [email protected]
This opportunity is only open to organizations, applicants who are submitting grant applications on behalf of a company, state, local or tribal government, academia, or other type of organization.
Application Filing Name:
Select Forms to Complete
Mandatory
Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)
Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424B)
Attachments
Optional
Instructions Show Instructions >>
This electronic grants application is intended to be used to apply for the specific Federal funding opportunity referenced here. If the Federal funding opportunity listed Is not the opportunity for which you want to apply, close this application package by clicking on the "Cancer button at the top of this screen. You will then need to locate the correct Federal funding opportunity, download its application and then apply. OMB Number: 4040-0004 Expiration Date: 8/31/2016
Application for Federal Assistance SF-424
* 1. Type of Submission: •2. Type of Application: • If Revision, select appropriate letter(s):
Preapplication X New
X Application Continuation •Other (Specify):
Changed/Corrected Application Revision
' 3. Date Received: 4. Applicant Identifier. Completed by Grants.gov upon submission.
5a. Federal Entity Identifier: 5b. Federal Award Identifier:
State Use Only:
6. Date Received by State: 7. State Application Identifier:
8. APPLICANT INFORMATION:
* a. Legal Name: Calvert County Government
* b. Employer/Taxpayer Identification Number (EIN/TIN): * c. Organizational DUNS: 52-6002810
d. Address:
* Steed: 175 Main Street
Street2:
* City: Prince Frederick
County/Parish:
•State: MD: Maryland
Province:
*Country: USA: UNITED STATES
* Zip / Postal Code: 20678-0000
e. Organizational Unit:
Department Name: Division Name: Community Planning & Building
f. Name and contact Information of person to be contacted on matters involving this application:
Prefix: Ms. * First Name: Kirst i Middle Name:
* Last Name: Uuni la
Suffix:
Title: Historic Preservation Planner
Organizational Affiliation:
"Telephone Number 410-535-1600, ext . 2504 Fax Number: 410-414-3092
•Email: uunilak@co . cal .md. us
Application for Federal Assistance SF-424
* 9. Type of Applicant 1: Select Applicant Type: B: County Government Type of Applicant 2: Select Applicant Type:
Type of Applicant 3: Select Applicant Type:
* Other (specify):
* 10. Name of Federal Agency: National Park Service
11. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:
15.904 CFDA Title: Historic Preservation Fund Grants-In-Aid
* 12. Funding Opportunity Number: Pl5AS00078 * Title: Historic Preservation Fund Grants to Underrepresented Communities
13. Competition Identification Number:
Title:
14. Areas Affected by Project (Cities, Counties, States, etc.):
. fi.; %,t,- =huz-ili Delete Attachment View Attachment Areas affected by the proposed proj ect .pdf -- -, • .
* 15. Descriptive Title of Applicant's Project: Preparing a Multiple Property National Register Nomination for the Piscataway Indian Archaeological Landscape
Attach supporting documents as specified in agency instructions.
Add Attachments L.f.r , i it f , -,,- I 1:-. . u I.n ni,--.
Application for Federal Assistance SF-424
16. Congressional Districts Of:
* a. Applicant MD-005 * b. Program/Project MD- 005
Attach an additional list of Program/Project Congressional Districts if needed.
Add Attachment : .11, : , ,.!.
17. Proposed Project:
* a. Start Date: 10/15/2015 * b. End Date: 10/14/2016
18. Estimated Funding ($):
* a. Federal 48,450.00
* b. Applicant 1,925.00
* c. State 16,497.00
* d. Local 0.00
* e. Other 0.00
* f. Program Income I 0.00
*g. TOTAL 66,872.00
* 19. Is Application Subject to Review By State Under Executive Order 12372 Process?
a. This application was made available to the State under the Executive Order 12372 Process for review on b. Program is subject to E.O. 12372 but has not been selected by the State for review.
X c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.
• 20. Is the Applicant Delinquent On Any Federal Debt? (If "Yes," provide explanation In attachment.) Yes X No
If "Yes", provide explanation and attach .--..1- 1 T.1,-. t D .. . .,1 . oi . _ _ ..
21. *By signing this application, I certify (1) to the statements contained in the list of certifications** and (2) that the statements herein are true, complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I also provide the required assurances** and agree to comply with any resulting terms If I accept an award. I am aware that any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or claims may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties. (U.S. Code, Title 218, Section 1001)
X ** I AGREE
** The list of certifications and assurances, or an intemet site where you may obtain this list, is contained in the announcement or agency specific instructions.
Authorized Representative:
Prefix: Mr. * First Name: St even
Middle Name: iR.
• Last Name: Weems
Suffix:
* Title: President, Calvert County Commissioners
* Telephone Number: 410-535-1600 Fax Number:
* Email: commiss@co . cal . md. us
* Signature of Authorized Representative: Completed by Grants.gov upon submission. * Date Signed: Completed by Grants.gov upon submission. OMB Number: 4040-0007 Expiration Date: 06/30/2014
ASSURANCES - NON-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0348-0040), Washington, DC 20503.
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET. SEND IT TO THE ADDRESS PROVIDED BY THE SPONSORING AGENCY.
NOTE: Certain of these assurances may not be applicable to your project or program. If you have questions, please contact the awarding agency. Further, certain Federal awarding agencies may require applicants to certify to additional assurances. If such is the case, you will be notified.
As the duly authorized representative of the applicant, I certify that the applicant:
1. Has the legal authority to apply for Federal assistance Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. §794), which and the institutional, managerial and financial capability prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicaps; (d) (including funds sufficient to pay the non-Federal share the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U. of project cost) to ensure proper planning, management S.C. H6101-6107), which prohibits discrimination on and completion of the project described in this the basis of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and application. Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-255), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug 2. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General abuse; (f) the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and of the United States and, if appropriate, the State, Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation through any authorized representative, access to and Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-616), as amended, relating to the right to examine all records, books, papers, or nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol abuse or documents related to the award; and will establish a alcoholism; (g) §§523 and 527 of the Public Health proper accounting system in accordance with generally Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S.C. §§290 dd-3 and 290 accepted accounting standards or agency directives. ee- 3), as amended, relating to confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of the Civil 3. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. §§3601 et seq.), as using their positions for a purpose that constitutes or amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, presents the appearance of personal or organizational rental or financing of housing; (i) any other conflict of interest, or personal gain. nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which application for Federal assistance is being 4. Will initiate and complete the work within the applicable made; and, (j) the requirements of any other time frame after receipt of approval of the awarding nondiscrimination statute(s) which may apply to the agency. application. 7. Will comply, or has already complied, with the 5. Will comply with the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of requirements of Titles II and III of the Uniform 1970 (42 U.S.C. §§4728-4763) relating to prescribed Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition standards for merit systems for programs funded under Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646) which provide for one of the 19 statutes or regulations specified in fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or Appendix A of OPM's Standards for a Merit System of whose property is acquired as a result of Federal or Personnel Administration (5 C.F.R. 900, Subpart F). federally-assisted programs. These requirements apply to all interests in real property acquired for 6. Will comply with all Federal statutes relating to project purposes regardless of Federal participation in nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: purchases. (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color 8. Will comply, as applicable, with provisions of the or national origin; (b) Title IX of the Education Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. §§1501-1508 and 7324-7328) Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C.§§1681- which limit the political activities of employees whose 1683, and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on principal employment activities are funded in whole the basis of sex; (c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation or in part with Federal funds.
Previous Edition Usable Standard Form 424B (Rev. 7-97) Authorized for Local Reproduction Prescribed by OMB Circular A-102 9. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis- 13. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. §§276a to 276a-7), the Copeland Act with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation (40 U.S.C. §276c and 18 U.S.C. §874), and the Contract Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. §470), EO 11593 Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. §§327- (identification and protection of historic properties), and 333), regarding labor standards for federally-assisted the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of construction subagreements. 1974 (16 U.S.C. §§469a-1 et seq.). 10. Will comply, if applicable, with flood insurance purchase 14. Will comply with P.L. 93-348 regarding the protection of requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster human subjects involved in research, development, and Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) which requires related activities supported by this award of assistance. recipients in a special flood hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total cost of 15. Will comply with the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of insurable construction and acquisition is $10,000 or more. 1966 (P.L. 89-544, as amended, 7 U.S.C. §§2131 et seq.) pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of 11. Will comply with environmental standards which may be warm blooded animals held for research, teaching, or prescribed pursuant to the following: (a) institution of other activities supported by this award of assistance. environmental quality control measures under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) and 16. Will comply with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Executive Order (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. §§4801 et seq.) which facilities pursuant to EO 11738; (c) protection of wetlands prohibits the use of lead-based paint in construction or pursuant to EO 11990; (d) evaluation of flood hazards in rehabilitation of residence structures. floodplains in accordance with EO 11988; (e) assurance of 17. Will cause to be performed the required financial and project consistency with the approved State management compliance audits in accordance with the Single Audit program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular No. A-133, Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. §§1451 et seq.); (f) conformity of "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans Organizations." under Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§7401 et seq.); (g) protection of 18. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other underground sources of drinking water under the Safe Federal laws, executive orders, regulations, and policies Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended (P.L. 93-523); governing this program. and, (h) protection of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (P.L. 93- 19. Will comply with the requirements of Section 106(g) of 205). the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000, as amended (22 U.S.C. 7104) which prohibits grant award 12. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of recipients or a sub-recipient from (1) Engaging in severe 1968 (16 U.S.C. §§1271 et seq.) related to protecting forms of trafficking in persons during the period of time components or potential components of the national that the award is in effect (2) Procuring a commercial wild and scenic rivers system. sex act during the period of time that the award is in effect or (3) Using forced labor in the performance of the award or subawards under the award.
SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED CERTIFYING OFFICIAL TITLE
Completed on submission to Grants.gov President, Calvert County Commissioners
APPLICANT ORGANIZATION DATE SUBMITTED
Calvert County Government Completed on submission to Grants.gov
Standard Form 424B (Rev. 7.97) Back
ATTACHMENTS FORM
Instructions: On this form, you will attach the various files that make up your grant application. Please consult with the appropriate Agency Guidelines for more information about each needed file. Please remember that any files you attach must be in the document format and named as specified in the Guidelines.
Important: Please attach your files in the proper sequence. See the appropriate Agency Guidelines for details.
1) Please attach Attachment 1 Add Attachment
2) Please attach Attachment 2 Add Attachment
3) Please attach Attachment 3 Add Attachment
4) Please attach Attachment 4 Add Attachment
5) Please attach Attachment 5 Add Attachment
6) Please attach Attachment 6 Add Attachment r.
7) Please attach Attachment 7 Add Attachment
8) Please attach Attachment 8 Add Attachment
9) Please attach Attachment 9 Add Attachment
10) Please attach Attachment 10 Add Attachment
,nt 11) Please attach Attachment 11 Add Attachment .•Li: I
12) Please attach Attachment 12 Add Attachment
13) Please attach Attachment 13 Add Attachment
14) Please attach Attachment 14 Add Attachment
15) Please attach Attachment 15 Add Attachment `•riot' Attachment I Preparing a Multiple Property National Register Nomination for the Piscataway Indian Archaeological Landscape
Detailed Budget
1. Personnel. Provide the names and titles of key project personnel. Include only the percentage of time used on the project. Please note that grant funds may not be used to pay Federal employee salaries, nor may Federal salaries be used as match/cost share.
Name/Title of Position and % of time Wage or Salary Federal Grant Match /Cost Total spent on this Project Funds Share (if any) Julia A. King, Principal Investigator, 10% of time, 185 days $ 50.00/hour $0.00 $ 7,400.00 $ 7,400.00 Scott M. Strickland, Project Archaeologist, 100% of time, 185 days $ 22.50/hour $ 33,300.00 $0.00 $ 33,300.00 Assistant Archaeologist, to be hired, 100% of time, 70 days $12.50/hour $ 7,000.00 $0.00 $ 7,000.00
Subtotal $40,300.00 $7,400.00 $47,700.00
2. Fringe Benefits. If more than one rate is used, list each rate and the wage or salary base.
Rate Salary or Wage Federal Grant Match / Cost Total Base Funds Share (if any) Julia A. King, Principal Investigator 28% of hourly rate $ 50.00 $0.00 $ 2,072.00 $2,072.00
Scott M. Strickland, 8% of hourly rate $ 22.50 $ 2,640.00 $0.00 $2,640.00 Assistant Archaeologist, 8% of hourly rate $12.50 $ 560.00 $0.00 $560.00
Subtotal $3,200.00 $ 2.072.00 $ 5,272.00
3. Consultant Fees. Include;payments for professional and technical consultants participating in the project. Maximum hourly rates charged to this grant may not exceed 120% of the salary of a Federal Civil Service GS-15, Step 10.
Name and Type of Consultant # of Rate of Federal Grant Match/Cost Total Days compensation or Funds Share (if any) fixed rate for project Kevin Norris, Registered Maryland Surveyor 2 $ 300/day $ 600.00 $0.00 $600.00
Subtotal $ 600.00 $ $600.00
4. Travel and Per Diem. Indicate the number of persons traveling, the total days they will be in travel status, and the total subsistence and transportation costs.
From/To # of # of Subsistence Transportation Federal Match/ Total People Travel Costs Costs (Airfare Grant Cost Days (Lodging and and Mileage) Funds Share (if Per Diem) any)
N/A $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
Subtotal $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 5. Office Supplies and Materials. Include consumable supplies and materials to be used in the project and any items of expendable equipment, i.e., equipment costing less than $5000 or with an estimated useful life of less than two years. Equipment costing more than that should be listed in Equipment -Category 6.
Item Cost Federal Grant Match/Cost Total Funds Share (if any)
Bags, pens, sharpies $ $ 0.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00
Subtotal $ 0.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00
6. Equipment. List all equipment items in excess of $5000. Items worth less than $5000 or that have a useful life of less than two years must be listed in Supplies and Materials - Category 5.
Item Cost Federal Grant Match/Cost Total Funds Share (if any)
N/A $ $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
Subtotal $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
7. Other (specify).
Item Cost Federal Grant Match / Cost Total Funds Share (if any) Indirect costs, calculated at 25% of contractual salaries $ $ 4,350.00 $ 6,525.00 $ 10,875.00
Subtotal $ 4,350.00 $ 6,525.00 $ 10,875.00
BUDGET SUMMARY Enter category totals here
Category Federal Grant Funds Match/Cost Share Total
1. Personnel $ 40,300.00 $ 7,400.00 $ 47,700.00
2. Fringe Benefits $ 3,200.00 $ 2,072.00 $ 5,272.00
3. Consultant Fees $ 600.00 $ 0.00 $ 600.00
4. Travel and Per Diem $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
5. Supplies and Materials $ 0.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00
6. Equipment $0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
7. Other $4,350.00 $ 6,525.00 $ 10,875.00
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $48,450.00 $ 16,497.00 $ 64,947.00 Preparing a Multiple Property National Register Nomination for the Piscataway Indian Archaeological Landscape
Statement Addressing the Seven Items in Section C of the FY2015 Application Guidelines
1. Briefly summarize your project emphasizing the primary objectives and results.
The proposed project includes the preparation of a multiple property National Register nomination of Piscataway Indian-related archaeological sites on the lower western shore of Maryland. The Piscataway Indians were one of two powerful Indian nations living along the Potomac River when colonists first arrived in the river drainage in the early 17th century. Surprisingly few Piscataway and Piscataway-related archaeological sites have been identified and, with one important exception, none are listed on the National Register. Working with members of the recently (2012) state-recognized Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland, students and faculty from St. Mary's College of Maryland, and three additional CLG counties, the Calvert County Historic Preservation Commission will use the National Register process to articulate a broader and more public narrative of Piscataway history grounded in the landscape and informed by archaeological, documentary, and oral history research. The nomination will consist of six sites from four counties; funds are requested to complete NR evaluation at two sites, including additional archaeological testing, followed by the preparation and submission of a six-property NR nomination.
2. Describe the historic resources affected by this project, including a description of why the applicant has determined them to be underrepresented in the National Register of Historic Places, and whether they are listed in the National Register of Historic Places and/or designated at the State, Tribal, or local level.
The Significance of the Piscataway Indians to Maryland and American History
The Piscataway Indians trace their history back centuries before contact with Europeans. Beginning about the 13th century, archaeological evidence suggests the growing political and cultural significance of Moyaone, the Piscataway capital (also known as the Accokeek Creek site), and the Piscataway eventually came to control much of the activity on the north shore of the Potomac River. Researchers have used documents, archaeological evidence, and oral histories to reveal a complex and dynamic landscape in the centuries before and following contact. This work has revealed the critical importance of Anglo-Native interaction, relations, and diplomacy beginning in 1608 with Captain John Smith's voyage up the Potomac and continuing well into the early 18th century and later.
Relations with the Potomac nations served both the early Jamestown settlement and the Natives in their ongoing struggles with the Powhatans, and events on the Potomac involving the Piscataway and other nations precipitated Bacon's Rebellion in 1676. Although the Piscataway as an organized political entity left Maryland in 1712, dozens if not more than a hundred individual Piscataway remained in their homeland. Today, their
1 descendants recognize many of the places this project will focus on as important to their identity; other places, no longer remembered as a result of the "forced forgetting" brought about by early 20th-century assimilation programs, have been rediscovered as a result of a growing and productive if informal partnership between contemporary Piscataway, county and state governments, and students and faculty at St. Mary's College of Maryland. Through the proposed project, the Calvert County Historic Preservation Commission hopes to continue and foster this partnership while adding to the record of the nation's significant historic sites and places.
Why Piscataway Indian Sites Are Under-Represented in the National Register
Despite the obvious significance of the Piscataway nation to Maryland and American history, surprisingly few Piscataway sites have been identified and, as noted, with one important exception, none are listed on the National Register nor have formal determinations of eligibility been made about these landscapes.
The noted exception is the Accokeek Creek Site (18PR8) or Moyaone, located at the mouth of Piscataway Creek in Prince George's County (see map). As noted earlier, Moyaone served as the capital of the Piscataway nation from about 1300 AD until the very early 17th century. John Smith saw and mapped the settlement of Moyaone. In addition, Susquehannock Indians seeking refuge in Maryland in 1674 built a fort not far from Moyaone also at the mouth of Piscataway Creek; a siege of this fort by Maryland and Piscataway forces in 1675 and its aftermath ultimately led to events precipitating Bacon's Rebellion.
The Accokeek Creek site, including both Moyaone and Susquehannock Fort, were extensively excavated in the 1930s and 40s by avocational archaeologists. The sites were purchased in the early 1960s to protect the Mount Vernon viewshed. In 1964, the Accokeek Creek site, now owned by the National Park Service, was designated a National Historic Landmark. The site's archaeological collections are currently housed at the Museum of Anthropological Archaeology at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Although the majority of artifacts have little to no provenience information, the State of Maryland is working with tribal representatives to request from the university the transfer of materials to a repository in Maryland.
A second significant landscape includes the Posey site (18CH281), located along Mattawoman Creek in Charles County. The Posey site, which is on land controlled by the Department of the Navy, was discovered in 1959 when an explosion associated with naval bomb-making activities revealed hundreds of ceramic fragments, tobacco pipes, shell beads, and copper artifacts. The site was tested in 1996 by archaeologists from the state-run Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum in an effort to examine the state of the site's archaeological integrity. Although intact features were observed, it was clear to the researchers that a significant portion of the site had been disturbed or destroyed. The researchers were able to conclude that the site represented a c. 1650-1680 elite settlement, perhaps for the Mattawoman "king" (the English word for chief) or one of his great men.
2 Neither the Accokeek Creek site (18PR8) nor the Posey site (18CH281) will be included as part of the proposed multiple property nomination, although the histories of both settlements will be used to provide important context for our effort. The Accokeek Creek site is already an NHL, and the extensive disturbance of the Posey site is believed by researchers to have impacted the site's integrity.
Beginning around 2008 and spurred in part by the commemoration of the 400th anniversary of John Smith's Chesapeake voyages, Piscataway history again captured the public's attention. Separately, the Piscataway Indian Nation and the Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland were re-embarking on the process that would, in 2012, culminate in their recognition by the State of Maryland.
At the same time, Calvert County government was involved in the acquisition of an important property along Battle Creek (a tributary of the Patuxent River) containing thick shell midden deposits. A private-public partnership between local business leaders and St. Mary's College of Maryland (a four-year public liberal arts college) was focused on identifying settlements important to Piscataway history in Charles, Prince George's, and St. Mary's counties, providing students with experience in cultural resource management, and raising awareness of an indigenous landscape still visible to anyone who chose to see it.
Despite the recession and sequester, southern Maryland remains one of the fastest growing regions in the state and three of the region's four counties are considered part of the Washington DC Metropolitan Area. Given the development pressures faced by southern Maryland, in 2013, Preservation Maryland, a non-rofit statewide preservation organization, placed Maryland's Indigenous Landscapes, including the Piscataway landscape, on its list of the state's most threatened historic properties (Preservation Maryland 2013).
As more and more Piscataway-related sites continued to be (re)discovered and threats to these properties identified, greater coordination between agencies and organizations has led to the preparation of this proposal.
In partnership with St. Mary's College of Maryland and with the support of the region's other three Certified Local Governments (Charles, Prince George's, and St. Mary's counties), the Calvert County Historic Preservation Commission anticipates that the preparation of a multi-property National Register nomination of significant Piscataway historic properties will serve to both raise and sustain awareness of these under- represented sites in the National Register, and raise awareness about the vibrant Piscataway community that lives in the region.
Specific Landscapes
For the proposed project, we plan to focus on preparing a multiple-property nomination for six landscapes/sites, all associated with the Piscataway or with Piscataway-affiliated groups. All of the sites are found in the Piscataway's ancestral homeland, including the
3 four counties that today make up the lower western shore of Maryland (Calvert, Charles, the southern portion of Prince George's, and St. Mary's counties). These sites contain evidence of occupation stretching back several centuries and continuing into the early 18th century. All of the sites have been discovered and documented since 2008. While all of the sites have been registered with the state's archaeological registrar, no formal determinations of eligibility have been undertaken, and none are listed as state or local landmarks.
These sites, arranged chronologically, include:
❖ Torp's Lament (18CV495), located along Battle Creek in Calvert County, is a relatively intact shell midden site dating between 1000 and 1300 AD. "Phase I" investigations (identification) have yielded shell-tempered Townsend ceramics, projectile points, stone flakes (some from hundreds of miles away), and animal bone, including turtle and deer. This relatively hidden and protected site has the potential to be an excellent example of a settlement absorbed by the Piscataway as they began to consolidate their political power.
View of Battle Creek from Torp's Lament (18CV495).
❖ Cecomocomoco (18ST51), located at the mouth of the Wicomico River in St. Mary's County, is a 25-acre shell midden occupied about 1000 AD through the early 17th century. Cecomocomoco is probably the "king's" town of the same name shown on the 1608 Smith map (published in 1612). A limited non- collection Phase I archaeological survey of the site (now an agricultural field) revealed dozens of Indian ceramics, oyster shell, and stone artifacts scattered across the ground's surface. A copper fragment collected from the site's surface was subjected to X-Ray Fluorescence testing; the copper's elemental composition
4 suggests the copper is native and further suggests that this settlement is a place of both political and spiritual power.
• Mattapanient Fort, c. before 1608-1658(?), is located at the tidal headwaters of the Patuxent River in Prince George's County. The fort was visited by Captain John Smith in 1608 and, in 1658, two English run-away servants stayed with the Indians residing there. This site, recently identified through documents and reanalysis of materials from survey work conducted in the 1980s, is located on Mataponi Creek in Prince George's County. A 1720 deed noting the presence of the fort's ruins has led to its re-discovery. A small existing collection from the site (made from a brief pass-over) includes several fragments of Potomac Creek ceramics, quartz flakes, and flakes of European flint. This site will be further tested this summer using by archaeologists from St. Mary's College of Maryland in an effort to collect additional data for site evaluation.
• Choptico Indian Town, located on Chaptico Bay in St. Mary's County, was a c. 1651-1715 settlement associated with several generations of Choptico leaders (tributary to the Piscataway). Choptico Indian Town, an important trading center, remained an important place for Native people staying in southern Maryland after the Piscataway as an organized nation migrated to Pennsylvania. The site has been lightly plowed and archaeological preservation is remarkably good. The site is characterized by intact shell middens, hearths, Townsend and Yeocomico ceramics, copper beads, and Indian-made and European-made clay tobacco pipes. softwilM1111111111111M c.0 InWl* I'll Al tr,
View of Chaptico Bay from Choptico Indian Town.
5 ❖ The Hawkins Gate site, located at the end of Hawkins Gate Road in Charles County, is a small settlement consisting of a number of Native households and a European trader. The site's location in the interior along Zekiah Swamp was at the time considered by English colonists as Native territory, occupied predominantly by Sacaya Indians (tributary to the Piscataway) as well as the site of the Piscataway winter hunting grounds. Testing revealed evidence for an English trader's household and a small hamlet of nearby Indian households. The site suggests the interaction taking place between indigenous people and English traders. Artifacts include a mixed assemblage of Native- and European-made materials.
❖ Zekiah Fort is a c. 1680-1692 fortified Piscataway settlement located approximately five miles south of Waldorf in Charles County. Zekiah Fort was where, in 1680, Piscataway and allied nations sought refuge from ongoing raids by the Susquehannock (Pennsylvania) and other northern Indian groups (including the Seneca). The site also represents that moment when the Piscataway were forced to abandon their ancient capital on Piscataway Creek. Archaeological investigations at Zekiah Fort have revealed evidence for both high and low status occupations, including hearths, post molds associated with dwelling structures, and features suggestive of a fortification. Artifacts include Potomac Creek and Townsend ceramics, brass projectile points, large numbers of gun flint, flint flakes, lead shot, gun parts, hundreds of glass beads, a brass finger ring with the initials "CC" (possibly for Charles Calvert, Lord Baltimore, at right)), and many other materials.
Site Name County Dates Site Type Owner Attitude
Shell midden / Torp's Lament Calvert 1000-1300 AD hamlet County Positive St. Large shell midden / Cecomocomoco Mary's 1000-1610 AD town / place of power Private Positive Mattapanient Prince Fort George's 1600-1660 AD Town / fort State Positive Choptico St. Indian Town Mary's 1650-1715 AD Town / trading place Private Neutral
Hawkin's Gate Charles 1660-1690 AD Trading place Private Positive Fort / hunting Zekiah Fort Charles 1680-1695 AD grounds County Positive The table, above, summarizes the six sites / landscapes that are the focus of the proposed project. 3. Describe the community that is represented by the resources to be surveyed and listed by this project. Describe why this community of people is underrepresented in the stories and understanding of the history of your jurisdiction.
Although most histories of Maryland acknowledge the significance of the Piscataway nation to the founding and settlement of the colony, in reality, this acknowledgment is rarely explored or engaged, especially in public contexts. Instead, Piscataway disappearance is implied by little mention of the group beyond the Maryland colony's earliest years. In reality, the Maryland government and Piscataway nation formed a long- standing diplomatic relationship which served to minimize the often violent conflicts that were so typical between Virginians and the Powhatans; Anglo-Native diplomacy in Maryland is a remarkable study in contrast with Virginia.
It is the case that the Piscataway as an organized polity left Maryland in 1712; not surprisingly, the Piscataway government was rarely mentioned in colonial documents after that time, further contributing to a sense of disappearance. In reality, however, many — perhaps even a majority — of Piscataway and Piscataway-affiliated people remained in Maryland, adapting to life in a colonized land. This adaptation took a variety of forms as Indian people were continually marginalized and, increasingly, their identity challenged. Governmental programs and policies of the late 19th and early to mid-20th centuries were often successful in their efforts to create interruptions in the transmittal of indigenous knowledge. Beginning in the late 20th century, Piscataway people joined together to reclaim their identity and this knowledge through the state recognition process.
The quest for state recognition has led to critical readings of historical documents and the Piscataway have been able to trace their ties to the 18th century. The struggle for recognition, however, was a long one, beginning officially in 1990, as the Piscataway invested heavily in the collection of research tracing their ancestry. At one point, the law changed, increasing documentation requirements. The Piscataway forged ahead. Finally, after being denied recognition in 2005, two Piscataway groups were recognized by Executive Order in January 2012. These groups include the Piscataway Indian Nation and the Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland.
Today, more than 4,100 Piscataway people are enrolled in one of the two state- recognized groups. The majority of the groups' respective members live in southern Maryland although there is a sizable Piscataway diaspora. The Piscataway Indian Nation, with approximately 100 members, is led by Chief Billy Redwing Tayac while the Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland is led by Tribal Chair Francis Gray and a advisory Council.
For many years, tribal members have worked with archaeologists and land managers to raise public awareness of Piscataway-related settlements and landscapes. The importance of place to identity was recognized when, beginning in 2008 and continuing to today, private parties as well as the Maryland Historical Trust (MDSHPO) generously funded what has become the Piscataway Landscapes Survey project. The purpose of this project is the identification of Piscataway-related sites and landscapes.
7 Members of the Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland at a smudging ceremony at Zekiah Fort. Tribal Chair Francis Gray is in the yellow shirt in the lower right.
Although the Piscataway people are confident in both their identity and their future, they are less certain about the public's awareness of who they are and the role their history has played in the history of the state and nation. Members of the Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland have therefore mobilized tribal committees to raise public awareness through powwows, appearances on local radio and cable stations, an annual Indian Heritage Month event, and other projects.
Members are also working with archaeologists, land managers, and preservationists from the four southern Maryland counties to develop the Piscataway Indian Heritage Trail (PIHT). Consultants Michael and Elizabeth Clarke have been recently retained to develop the master plan for the PIHT. The PIHT has rapidly become an important tool for linking Maryland's modern Piscataway people to their ancestral places and sharing that information with a broad audience, serving tourism, economic development, and historic preservation goals as well as tribal goals.
8 4. Describe how the proposed project will help preserve the resources and cultural assets associated with communities that are currently underrepresented in the stories of your jurisdiction.
The National Register of Historic Places provides yet another tool for raising public awareness through an emphasis on "the Nation's historic places worthy of preservation." Archaeological properties can especially benefit from NR designation given that, by their very nature, these historic properties can be difficult for the general public to "see" or imagine in the same way a standing structure is perceived.
National Register designation provides an external acknowledgment at the Federal level that these sites are indeed significant and worth protecting. Of the six sites selected for inclusion in the proposed multiple property nomination, three are privately owned, two are county owned, and one is state owned. Two of the privately owned sites were acquired by their owners for preservation purposes: the owner of Cecomocomoco is preserving the site through the creation of a non-profit land trust while the owner of Hawkin's Gate acquired the property expressly for the preservation of the archaeological site and its connection to his family. In the case of the county-owned properties, two were acquired for preservation purposes. The state-owned site was acquired for the purpose of creating a wildlife preserve; NR designation will enhance the cultural value of the land.
In the case of archaeological sites, multiple property nominations are considered especially useful for providing "excellent source material for both professional research and popular interpretation" (Little et al., National Register Bulletin: Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Archeological Properties, 2000).
5. Describe the project activities necessary to achieve the proposal objectives. List and describe all tasks and products.
Much of the information needed to prepare a multiple property submission for four of the six Piscataway sites has already been collected. What remains to be done is (1) collection of additional field data from two sites, including Torp's Lament and Cecomocomoco, in an effort to formally evaluate the integrity and eligibility of those sites; and (2) preparation of a multiple property nomination for the six sites.
Task 1: Phase II fieldwork at Torp's Lament:
This task will include the excavation of an additional 78 shovel tests spaced at 25 ft intervals and the excavation of up to 5 5x5-ft test units (Torp's Lament is located in a plowed field). Soil will be screened through 1/4-inch mesh, all artifacts collected, and detailed records (provenience cards, maps, photographs, etc.) prepared. All work will be done and reported in conformance with Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in Maryland and collections will be processed and curated according to state curation standards. Estimated number of days for a crew of two, including report preparation: 45 days.
9 Task 2: Phase II fieldwork at Cecomocomoco:
This task will include the excavation of approximately 1000 shovel tests and up to 5 5x5- ft test units (Cecomocomoco covers 25 acres of a plowed field). Soil will be screened through '/-inch mesh, all artifacts collected, and detailed records (provenience cards, maps, photographs, etc.) prepared. All work will be done and reported in conformance with Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in Maryland and collections will be processed and curated according to state curation standards. Estimated number of days for a crew of two, including report production: 95 days.
Archaeologists examine ceramic fragments recovered from the surface of a site believed to be the town of Cecomocomoco. The shell midden is evident in the background.
Task 3: Preparation of a Multiple Property National Register Nomination:
This task will involve the preparation of a multiple property nomination for the six Piscataway-related archaeological sites and landscapes (following Little et al., 2000 and Antoinette Lee and Linda McClelland, How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form, 1999). This will include preparing individual registration forms for the six sites along with a multiple property documentation form. Little at al. 2000 point out that nominating an archaeological site to the National Register can be "similar to a synopsis of an archeological research report." Detailed site reports exist for four of the six sites; reports for the remaining two sites will be completed through Tasks 1 and 2. Estimated number of days for a staff of one: 45 days.
10 6. Describe how the project meets the goals of the statewide preservation plan, or comparable planning document.
PreserveMaryland is Maryland's Statewide Preservation Plan, a five year plan adopted in 2014 (see http://mht.maryland.gov/plan.shtrn1), defines five goals for achieving the state's vision for historic preservation in Maryland. The proposed project is especially relevant to the aims defined for Goals 1, 3, and 5 in the plan.
Goal 1 of the plan calls for preservationists to "connect with broader audiences." While this goal does not explicitly define under-represented communities or minority communities as a targeted audience, the plan does advocate for identify "new constituencies" and educating "people about the history of their communities." The proposed project will serve both an under-represented community (the Piscataway) and a broader regional community who has little knowledge about the important role of Native Americans in Maryland history.
Goal 3 calls for "renewed focus and investment in the survey and documentation of historic and cultural resources." This project's emphasis on archaeological sites (as opposed to standing structures) and defming their significance beyond the reliable go-to of Criterion D might serve as a model for other jurisdictions with similar communities and resources. Goal 3 also recognizes the importance of "local citizens" (in this case, the Piscataway) for contributing information about historic places.
Goal 5 calls for "collaboration to advance shared objectives," including addressing threats posed by climate change and the importance of economic development, especially heritage tourism. With regard to the state's lower western shore (the ancestral Piscataway homeland), the plan specifically notes that:
...more survey is needed to document and understand Native American sites... In addition to better planning review, more interpretative and preservation strategies for significant Native American sites must be developed. In the big picture, preservation efforts would greatly benefit from a way to connect those sites into a more cohesive interpretation of tribal histories across the state.
The Plan further notes the importance of the National Park Service's Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail; as previously noted in this proposal, master planning is underway for a Piscataway Indian Heritage Trail. The proposed project will constitute a direct and substantive contribution to Goal 5.
7. Describe the public private partnerships and community engagement involved in the project and how these partnerships will sustain and continue to support the resource(s) after the grant project is complete.
Public-private partnerships and community engagement, while informal and loosely coordinated, have created the conditions that make it possible to apply for this grant. These partnerships include county and state government, business leaders, and a small
11 public liberal arts college, and include ongoing commitments by all of these entities to work with the Piscataway.
The proposed project represents an expanded partnership that pulls together all of these parties, working together across political and geographical lines. The Piscataway people are served by the formal designation and anticipated protection of sites important to their heritage; local citizens and tourists are served by the educational opportunities designation can afford (such as through a more informed Piscataway Indian Heritage Trail) as well as through potential economic development; local and state government land managers are served
Students from St. Mary's College of Maryland dig and record shovel tests at Choptico Indian Town.
12