CULTURAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT PHASES

The identification, evaluation, and treatment of cultural resources is divided into three primary divisions or Phases for discussion and management purposes.  The initial resource identification study is referred to as a Phase I reconnaissance survey.  This is followed by a Phase II resource evaluation study and a Phase III impact mitigation.

A Phase I survey typically consists of an existing documentation search at the California State records repository and other information sources, physical inspection of the project area, and a written report describing the proposed development, the existing conditions, a summary of identified cultural resources within and adjacent to the project area, and recommendations.  A constraints-level study, requiring only a summary of existing documentation, may precede the Phase I survey to provide clients with project feasibility information.

Phase II cultural resource studies are designed to gather information necessary for an evaluation of site significance/importance.  Criteria for determination of site significance are specified in sections of the applicable legislation governing the study of the project area (NEPA, CEQA).  Phase II evaluations typically summarize existing data and collect a limited amount of physical evidence from the archaeological sites under investigation.  These limited samples may be obtained from surface observation, collection and analysis of surface artifacts, and/or the analysis of the subsurface artifacts recovered from excavation.  The goals of evaluation study include: the horizontal and vertical (depth) dimensions of the sites, assignment to one or more time periods (through the analysis of time-sensitive artifacts and various dating techniques), artifact constituents, depositional integrity (the amount of site disturbance), the prospects of obtaining additional scientific and cultural information, and recommendations for treatment.

Phase III mitigation studies are a direct outgrowth of Phase II evaluations.  Recommendations presented at the conclusion of the Phase II report are interpreted by the lead agency reviewers and typically included as conditions for permit approval.  Sites found not to be of scientific or cultural significance usually require only archaeological monitoring during development.  Significant cultural resources, i.e., those that contain or are likely to contain information of interest to the public, science, or specific cultural groups, require more intensive efforts.  Preservation through project redesign, site avoidance, deed restrictions, and/or site capping are often the most desirable treatment from a management perspective.  Where preservation cannot be accommodated, collection of a representative sample of the site materials in a controlled fashion (surface artifact collection and/or subsurface excavation) is often mandated; this is referred to as "Data Recovery". 

Data recovery programs implement a lead agency-approved research design to guide the questions to be addressed, sample size, excavation methods, and analyses.  These programs most often include the combination of hand- and machine-excavated artifact samples ranging between 5 and 15 percent of the site or impact area.  Questions often address inquiries into modes of subsistence, resource exploitation, as well as, internal and external group interactions and other applicable avenues given site-specific data gathered during previous phases. 

Pacific West Archaeology staff would be happy to discuss any questions you may have.
E-mail Bglenn@PacificWestArch.com or call 760-765-1289.