Difference between revisions of "Template:Nhsc-v1-212"
From GrassrootWiki
Reid Ginoza (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Officer or the Federal | + | :: Officer or the Federal Preservation Officer not to submit an adequately-documented nomination form to the National Park Service after it has been processed by the State or Federal agency; |
| − | Preservation Officer not to | + | |
| − | submit an | + | :: 2) Disagrees with a decision of the State Historic Preservation Officer not to submit an adequately-documented nomination form to the State Review Board; |
| − | nomination form to | + | |
| − | the National Park Service | + | ::3) Believes that the State Historic Preservation Officer has not scheduled an adequately-documented nomination form for State Review Board consideration within a reasonable period of time consistent with the State's priorities for nominations. |
| − | after it has been processed by | + | |
| − | the State or Federal agency; | ||
| − | 2) Disagrees with a decision of | ||
| − | the State Historic | ||
| − | Preservation Officer not to | ||
| − | submit an | ||
| − | nomination form | ||
| − | to the State Review Board; | ||
| − | 3) Believes that the State | ||
| − | Historic Preservation | ||
| − | Officer has not scheduled an | ||
| − | adequately-documented | ||
| − | nomination form for State | ||
| − | Review Board consideration | ||
| − | within a reasonable period | ||
| − | of time consistent with the | ||
| − | State' | ||
| − | nominations. | ||
The Keeper will respond in writing | The Keeper will respond in writing | ||
to the request within 30 days. The | to the request within 30 days. The | ||
decision may: | decision may: | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | * Deny the appeal; | |
| − | Historic Preservation Office | + | * Recommend that the State Historic Preservation Office submit the nomination form to the State Review Board; |
| − | submit the nomination form to | + | * Recommend that the State Historic Preservation Officer submit the nomination form to the State Review Board for consideration at an earlier date than scheduled; |
| − | the State Review Board; | + | * Provide notice that the Keeper will consider for listing a nomination form previously approved or disapproved by the State Review Board or a Federal agency nomination form. |
| − | + | ||
| − | Historic Preservation Officer | + | ====Current Historic Preservation Issues==== |
| − | submit the nomination form to | ||
| − | the State Review Board for | ||
| − | consideration at an earlier | ||
| − | date than scheduled; | ||
| − | |||
| − | Keeper will consider for | ||
| − | listing a nomination form | ||
| − | previously approved or | ||
| − | disapproved by the State | ||
| − | Review Board or a Federal | ||
| − | agency nomination form. | ||
| − | Current Historic Preservation Issues | ||
The preceding sections have | The preceding sections have | ||
concentrated on existing State and | concentrated on existing State and | ||
| − | Federal laws on historic | + | Federal laws on historic preservation. |
However, as pointed out in comments | However, as pointed out in comments | ||
| − | received by the Commission, 40/ there | + | received by the Commission, <u>40</u>/ there |
| − | are numerous practical problems in | + | are numerous practical problems in the |
implementation and enforcement of | implementation and enforcement of | ||
these regulations. | these regulations. | ||
| + | |||
Native Hawaiians are concerned | Native Hawaiians are concerned | ||
about protection of ancient religious | about protection of ancient religious | ||
sites—a concern that was voiced to | sites—a concern that was voiced to | ||
| − | the Commission not only in the | + | the Commission not only in the written |
comments cited above, but in public | comments cited above, but in public | ||
testimony before the Commission in | testimony before the Commission in | ||
| − | January 1982. 41/ At the State level, | + | January 1982. <u>41</u>/ At the State level, |
a comment from Kenneth Chan notes that | a comment from Kenneth Chan notes that | ||
"the State Historic Preservation Plan | "the State Historic Preservation Plan | ||
| − | has not even been adopted into law, | + | <u>has not even been adopted into law</u>, |
and has in fact been shelved for the | and has in fact been shelved for the | ||
| − | past three years. There is | + | past three years. There is <u>no</u> comprehensive |
plan adopted and utilized by | plan adopted and utilized by | ||
| − | the State at this time." 42/ | + | the State at this time." <u>42</u>/ |
| + | |||
Another problem already mentioned | Another problem already mentioned | ||
above is the removal of 579 sites from | above is the removal of 579 sites from | ||
| Line 73: | Line 46: | ||
plague the State's historic | plague the State's historic | ||
preservation program. | preservation program. | ||
| + | |||
The problems of protecting historic | The problems of protecting historic | ||
sites of importance to native | sites of importance to native | ||
| Line 83: | Line 57: | ||
as sacred by native Hawaiians. | as sacred by native Hawaiians. | ||
According to one native Hawaiian: | According to one native Hawaiian: | ||
| − | The concerns of Hawaiians...are | + | |
| − | different from the concerns of | + | : The concerns of Hawaiians...are different from the concerns of archaeologists. We are trained in the Western scientific tradition. We see archaeologic sites primarily as repositories of information. This is in |
| − | archaeologists. We are trained | + | {{p|212}} |
| − | in the Western scientific | ||
| − | tradition. We see archaeologic | ||
| − | sites primarily as repositories | ||
| − | of information. This is in | ||
| − | 212 | ||
Latest revision as of 18:30, 13 April 2006
- Officer or the Federal Preservation Officer not to submit an adequately-documented nomination form to the National Park Service after it has been processed by the State or Federal agency;
- 2) Disagrees with a decision of the State Historic Preservation Officer not to submit an adequately-documented nomination form to the State Review Board;
- 3) Believes that the State Historic Preservation Officer has not scheduled an adequately-documented nomination form for State Review Board consideration within a reasonable period of time consistent with the State's priorities for nominations.
The Keeper will respond in writing to the request within 30 days. The decision may:
- Deny the appeal;
- Recommend that the State Historic Preservation Office submit the nomination form to the State Review Board;
- Recommend that the State Historic Preservation Officer submit the nomination form to the State Review Board for consideration at an earlier date than scheduled;
- Provide notice that the Keeper will consider for listing a nomination form previously approved or disapproved by the State Review Board or a Federal agency nomination form.
Current Historic Preservation Issues
The preceding sections have concentrated on existing State and Federal laws on historic preservation. However, as pointed out in comments received by the Commission, 40/ there are numerous practical problems in the implementation and enforcement of these regulations.
Native Hawaiians are concerned about protection of ancient religious sites—a concern that was voiced to the Commission not only in the written comments cited above, but in public testimony before the Commission in January 1982. 41/ At the State level, a comment from Kenneth Chan notes that "the State Historic Preservation Plan has not even been adopted into law, and has in fact been shelved for the past three years. There is no comprehensive plan adopted and utilized by the State at this time." 42/
Another problem already mentioned above is the removal of 579 sites from the State Register because they were not properly registered. In addition, staffing and funding difficulties also plague the State's historic preservation program.
The problems of protecting historic sites of importance to native Hawaiians are not totally administrative, however. An even greater difficulty may be that criteria for eligibility as they now exist do not always address the religious and cultural significance of land regarded as sacred by native Hawaiians. According to one native Hawaiian:
- The concerns of Hawaiians...are different from the concerns of archaeologists. We are trained in the Western scientific tradition. We see archaeologic sites primarily as repositories of information. This is in
|
