ARCHEOLOGICAL VANDALISM IN THE SOUTHEASTERN NATIONAL FORESTS

Rodney J. Snedeker and Michael A. Harmon

Abstract

.

Vandals have been destroying cultural resources in the Southeast for many years. Most archeologists can relate incidents of looters working alongside their own investigations. Although allowances for such destruction were made in order to preserve some scientific data, over the years apathy has grown on the part of professional archeologists and land managers. A large population of archeological sites looters with extensive networks has resulted. Artifact trading companies have sprung up as everyday businesses, along with equipment merchants. Metal detector advertisements are found in many magazines with wide circulation; newspaper articles promoting their "recreational" use can be read almost weekly throughout the Southeast. Neither the advertisements nor articles, except for a few, make reference to the importance of cultural resources and the potential damage caused by detectors, or the need for permission from land owners or managers.

The looting and vandalism of sites in the Southeast is now making headlines. The recent Slack Farm case in Kentucky has been well publicized. The March 1989 issue of National Geographic includes an article on Slack Farm and archeological vandalism. Increased public education on the importance of archeological sites and the destruction caused by looting is making it harder for the looters to continue. Changing land ownership is forcing looters off previously heavily potted sites; they are looking elsewhere and willing to go to less accessible places.

In the Southeast these trends are readily evident on National Forest Service managed lands. The looting on these lands has increased dramatically in the past five years and reached a point in the last two years whereby it has consumed a substantial amount of the time and budget of the Forest Service staff. The increase is accelerating at a rate equal to, if not greater than, that in other parts of the country. Vandalism in the Ocala National Forest illustrates that National Forest shoreline sites in Florida are being heavily looted (Figure 1). Pressures from private landowners and developers have pushed looters to these preserved sites which often contain artifacts not preserved under others conditions.

A parallel situation exists in the Daniel Boone National Forest in Kentucky (Figure 2). Here the most frequently looted sites are the dry rockshelters that also contain well preserved artifacts not found at other sites. Historic sites as well as prehistoric are being vandalized and looted. A Cherokee grave in the Nantahala National Forest, the historic grave of Cherokee Chief Kiesee on the Pisgah National Forest (Figure 3), the pre-Civil War Whitehead Cemetery in the Croatan National Forest, and the Union Fort Cannady on the Croatan National Forest-all in North Carolina-have recently been vandalized and looted.

In response to the increasing destruction of archeological sites, The Society for American Archaeology initiated the anti-looting project Saving the Past for the Future in July 1988. The goal is to develop strategies to protect archeological sites and to minimize vandalism and looting. The project "Background" states "numerous reports have documented an alarming and rapid increase in the looting of sites on public, private and Indian lands."

The Forest Service manages more than 13 million acres in its Southern Region, including land in 13 states and Puerto Rico. More than 1.2 million acres, about 10 percent of this landbase, has been inventoried for cultural resources. Almost 14 thousand sites have been recorded. The following data on vandalism has been compiled from the Forest Service's Southern Region 1989 report for the Department of the Interior's annual ARPA report:

• Prior to October 1987, only 25 documented cases of site looting were reported on Forest Service managed lands; since then, 116 documented cases have been reported. Apathy on the part of Forest Service personnel may account for part of this increase. Only five of the recent cases have resulted in arrests or citations.
• It is estimated that more than four million dollars is required for restoration of these sites; 15,000 dollars has already been spent just to document and temporarily stabilize these sites.
• One site requiring immediate attention following vandalism reports, was a late historic Creek hamlet (1MC81) in the Tuskegee National Forest, Macon County, Alabama. Approximately 35 percent of this National Register eligible site was impacted by looters, and data had to be retrieved for there was no way to be sure the vandals would not return.
• An additional thirty-five thousand dollars was spent on law enforcement efforts against site vandalism, primarily for surveillance and signing. Twenty-seven Forest Service employees (archeologists and law enforcement officers) received ARPA training in 1989.

Sites on National Forest lands have historically been less accessible than others. For this reason, many of the sites were relatively untouched by looters. Continued Forest Service management activities, coupled with adjacent private development and easier modes of access (off-road vehicles) have made many sites more accessible. Private development and changing ownership of land, much of which is being subdivided, are forcing looters to find new sites.

Looting condoned by private landowners of sites partially on Forest Service land does not make protection and enforcement an easy job. Looters recently encountered on a privately owned portion of a site, had a bright orange rope marking off "their area" (Figure 4). Although sites on Forest Service lands may now have easier access, looters have the luxury of surrounding vegetation and infrequent surveillance.

The Uwharrie National Forest in the Piedmont of North Carolina is one of four National Forests in the state. Occupying only 47,000 of the 1.2 million acres of Forest Service land in North Carolina, the Uwharrie contains 750 of the 1,686 recorded sites on Forest Service lands in the state. The Uwharrie is in an area that figures prominently in Southeastern archeology. Of Hardaway, Doerschuk, Morrow Mountain, Town Creek and Talbert, two sites-Doerschuk and Talbert (31MG22)-are partially located in the Forest.

Price lists for artifacts from this area are readily available (Figure 5). One from High Point, North Carolina in 1984, is broken down by projectile point types and by county; the latter probably due to the presence of these well known sites. A handful of projectile points is easily recovered from sites in the Uwharrie. More than ten projectile points "found in about thirty minutes" of digging were shown by looters who were really only interested in Paleoindian and Early Archaic sites, and wanted to know other locations of these site types in the Forest.

Artifacts have been collected from Hardaway and Doerschuk sites for years, especially since the publication of excavation results. Doerschuk was posted by the Forest Service and Office of State Archeology last year. Looting at Talbert and Doerschuk, as well as other sites in the area, has resulted in a bomb-crater effect on many significant archeological sites. Rare artifacts (soapstone bowl fragments for example) are often recovered from looter's backfill but now with a complete loss of provenience.

Hardaway, Doerschuk, and Talbert are on private lands owned by the Alcoa Power Company but now under lease to the state of North Carolina and subject to state antiquities laws. The adjacent Forest Service portions of Doerschuk and Talbert are subject to federal laws and access to both sites is across Forest Service land. The cooperative efforts of Alcoa, the state and the Forest Service, have made it much easier to conduct surveillance and protect Doerschuk and Talbert. However, these efforts have also caused the looters to move to other sites on the Uwharrie. The Wolf Den Quarry site (31MG744) was "hit hard" then abandoned by looters, probably because the cores, primary flakes, preforms, etc., were not priced high enough or easily shown off as Indian relics. The short duration of vandal activity has badly disturbed the previously intact activity areas of this shallow site.

Site 31MG745, also called Doerschuk II because of its location and the presence of ceramics, was recorded in 1985 and is considered to be one of the best preserved sites in the Forest. It is one of the most important given that it contains early deposits (Early Archaic) through later Woodland deposits with good stratigraphy evident. This site is also one of only 17 sites recorded in the Forest that contain prehistoric ceramics. The site is just upstream from Doerschuk on the same side of the river but in a topographic situation (knolltop) similar to the Hardaway site which is upstream across the Yadkin River. Doerschuk is in an alluvial situation.

Doerschuk II can be accessed by boat or on foot (while only 1.5 miles round trip on foot, the return demands a steep climb). However, illegal off-road vehicle use makes the site easily accessible. When the site was revisited in 1987, it was found to be "shovel tested" by looters, but only slightly disturbed. This was around the time when the Forest Service and State Office of Archeology began to more actively and aggressively address the looting problem.

Doerschuk II was revisited in 1988 because of the increase in vandalism at the nearby Doerschuk and Talbert sites and the increased illegal off-road vehicle impacts evident in the Forest. The vandalism at Doerschuk II had also increased and large potholes engulfed earlier "shovel tests" (Figure 6). A hidden screen (Figure 7) was found along with a bucket, pick head, trowel and caches of non-saleable artifacts (Figure 8). Even a previously photographed anvil stone was gone! Signs were posted at this time because it was obvious the looters were familiar with the location (Figure 9). No signs were posted earlier to avoid calling the site to the attention of off-road vehicle riders and hunters. Signing is one way to strengthen a court case against looters.

Although vandalism continues, it is now on a smaller scale at these sites in the Uwharrie National Forest. The vegetation is coming back as we continue our surveillance. However, several areas have recently been discovered where looters have covered up their diggings with brush. Two people were caught leaving the site and convicted of a misdemeanor. They paid their fines without any hesitation. At least the word has gotten out among collectors that efforts are being stepped up to protect sites.

Looting was reported at another site partially on Forest Service land by the adjacent private landowner in an effort to preserve it. Here, we found another equipment cache. Cooperation between the Forest Service and landowner and the involvement of the State Office of Archeology has stopped vandalism here and permitted the recovery of valuable data. Public involvement and coordination by the Forest Service and state has created some useful allies. Adjacent landowners are reporting looters as well as asking for professional investigation of their lands before initiating their own activities.

Conclusion

The looting of archeological sites has increased dramatically on Forest Service managed lands in the Southeast. We cannot wait any longer to control or stop the vandalism. Apathy will no longer suffice. Public education plays a vital part in curbing archeological vandalism, but is not the sole answer. Increased law enforcement by all agencies, training of land managers, and aggressive prosecution of looters must all happen. Most important, federal and state agencies, and other landowners must cooperate with each other and coordinate their actions.

In April 1988, the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, and the Bureau of Land Management in Utah, along with the state and the University of Utah, developed the San Juan County Pilot Project. A Geographic Information System was used to identify vulnerable areas basically using site types and accessibility and assigned and weighted values. Such an assessment is a must if we want to stop the looting of archeological sites.

We cannot wait for violations to happen or be reported. We must identify the susceptible sites and the vandals before damage is incurred. More intensive archeological inventories should be conducted. Quality data must be collected during these surveys from those sites that are most susceptible to vandalism. Risk analyses should be done by all land managing agencies. It is also time to emphasize indirect effects-increased road building, for example-and take them into account when determining necessary protection or mitigation of sites.

Read
"Preservation Is a Use: Sites Can Be Protected"

Return to the Table of Contents