Statement of opposition of the Indiana Archaeology Council

“The Indiana Archaeology Council opposes the proposed Mounds Lake because of the devastating and destructive impacts it would have upon the unique earthworks known as Anderson Mounds within Mounds State Park. The 2,000 year old Anderson Mounds are listed in the National Register and represent one of the best preserved earthwork sites in Indiana. This site was a place of ceremonial and ritual significance to the builders, it contains burials from that era, and it is of immeasurable importance to recognizing the cultural heritage of central Indiana. Because several of the earthworks are located at or near the bluff edge, the headland erosion that will result from wave wash will ultimately destroy earthworks and other sites located along the bluff. In addition, the lake would allow unregulated access to the earthworks and encourage looting and other damage. There are many other archaeological sites, both known and yet to be discovered, within the lake footprint including many (perhaps hundreds) of precontact Native American habitations and burial sites, Delaware villages, the Moravian mission site, the Amusement Park, the Hydraulic Canal, and others. Because of the loss of irreplaceable archaeological sites due to the impoundment of the proposed Mounds Lake, the members of the Indiana Archaeology Council are adamantly opposed to its development. Additional information about the archaeology of Anderson Mounds and Mounds State Park can be found here:       http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/123456789/194939

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’m reminded of a pertinent excerpt from Steven Semes book–

“Those of us who are in a position to make decisions about the future of historic environments need to view them according to a trajectory stretching from the past into the future.   The longer the arc in which we envision the history of a site, the deeper our understanding of it as both a historical and a future reality will be.  In this way, preservation gives the past a future.” …   

“Maintaining a broad stylistic consistency in traditional settings is not a matter of nostalgia.   It is a matter of common sense, of reinforcing the sense of place that made a building or neighborhood special to begin with.”

Source:  The Future of the Past– A Conservation Ethic for Architecture, Urbanism, and Historic Preservation, 2009, Steven W. Semes, Professor of Architecture, University of Notre Dame

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s