THE DIGITIZATION OF CALIFORNIA’S CULTURAL RESOURCE RECORDS
AND SURVEY REPORTS AT THE NORTH CENTRAL INFORMATION CENTER
A Project
Presented to the faculty of the Department of History
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
History
(Public History)
by
Machiel P. Van Dordrecht
SPRING
2014
© 2014
Machiel P. Van Dordrecht
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
THE DIGITIZATION OF CALIFORNIA’S CULTURAL RESOURCE RECORDS
AND SURVEY REPORTS AT THE NORTH CENTRAL INFORMATION CENTER
A Project
by
Machiel P. Van Dordrecht
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair
Christopher Castaneda, Ph.D.
__________________________________, Second Reader
Nathan Hallam, M.A.
____________________________
Date
iii
Student: Machiel P. Van Dordrecht
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
be awarded for the project.
__________________________, Graduate Coordinator
Patrick Ettinger, Ph.D.
Department of History
iv
___________________
Date
Abstract
of
THE DIGITIZATION OF CALIFORNIA’S CULTURAL RESOURCE RECORDS
AND SURVEY REPORTS AT THE NORTH CENTRAL INFORMATION CENTER
by
Machiel P. Van Dordrecht
The staff of the North Central Information Center (NCIC) of the California Historic
Resources Information System (CHRIS) is nearing the end of the process of digitizing the
NCIC’s inventory of cultural resource records and survey reports. The completion of the
digitization of cultural resources data entails many advantages for both the clients and for
the CHRIS itself, but it also necessitates considerations of security, quality control,
control of access, and the future of the CHRIS facilities.
_____________________________, Committee Chair
Christopher Castaneda, Ph.D.
_______________________
Date
v
PREFACE
The facilities of the California Historical Resource Information System (CHRIS)
serve the purpose of maintaining the State of California’s inventory of cultural resource
records and survey reports; they also provide access to those records to a variety of
agencies and clients. In order to better serve parties who require access to the inventory, a
plan was put into action to digitize the records of each of the current ten information
centers, with attribute information stored in a database, and locational data plotted in a
geographic information system (GIS), allowing for faster and more efficient records
searches, which can be delivered to the client via several mediums of digital
transportation.
Over the course of the past eight years, the staff at the North Central Information
Center (NCIC) in Sacramento, California, has been engaged in the process of digitizing
the cultural resources inventory for six of the state’s counties. The vast majority of the
NCIC’s inventory has now been digitized, with quality control of a small portion of the
data as the sole remaining obstacle. In areas where the data has been completely verified,
the NCIC has been providing electronic records search results to client. This has allowed
for much faster turnaround times for searches, and in many cases, speedier delivery of
products, and it has greatly enhanced the NCIC’s ability to respond to requests relating to
emergencies and natural disasters.
vi
The purpose of this thesis project is to provide information regarding the process
and significance of the digitization of California’s cultural resource and survey records,
and how those records are used to fulfill cultural resource records search requests for the
CHRIS’s clients.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank Sally Torpy, M.A., former coordinator of the North Central
Information Center, for giving me the opportunity to assist in the development of the
facility’s GIS program, as well as the standardization of digitization policies of the
CHRIS. It has been quite a journey over the past six years, and I’m very thankful to have
been able to directly influence the manner in which digital data is processed and
disseminated at the information center.
I would also like to thank Nathan Hallam, M.A., for providing the inspiration for
this project. Without his guidance, this project may not have been possible.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Preface......................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... viii
Chapter
1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................................1
Brief History of the CHRIS ...............................................................................1
Implementation of GIS ......................................................................................5
Operational Overview of the NCIC ...................................................................7
2. THE IMPORTANCE OF DIGITIZATION............................................................ 9
How Digitization Aids the Operations of the NCIC ..........................................9
How Digitization Aids the Clients of the NCIC ..............................................12
3. PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATIONS.............................................................. 15
Access to CHRIS Data .....................................................................................15
Security Measures ............................................................................................16
Quality Control Standards................................................................................18
The Future of Digital Access ...........................................................................18
Appendix A. Digitization of Documents Submitted to the Information Center ....... 20
Appendix B. Creation of Digitized Products for Clients ...........................................54
Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 66
ix
1
CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Brief History of the CHRIS
The origins of the current California Historical Resources Information System
(CHRIS) can be traced back to the formation of the University of California
Archaeological Resource Survey in 1948. The Survey was envisioned by UC
archaeologist Robert F. Heizer as a statewide cooperative effort between major
institutions that administered archaeological research programs. Unfortunately, this
vision ended in failure, as internal strife amongst the institutions regarding administrative
authority and funding allocation prevented the implementation of the cooperative aspect
of the plan. As a result, the Survey remained under the purview of the University of
California at Berkeley for the next few decades.1
California’s implementation of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) of 1966 created the need for a state government agency to implement the Act’s
requirements, including the need for a statewide historic preservation plan and survey
program for the evaluation of historic resources. These duties were handled by the State
Liason Officer until the establishment of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
in 1973. The Department of Parks and Recreation (a combination of the previous
David A. Frederickson, “Archaeological Data Management in California: History and Function of
the Information Center System” (Rohnert Park: Sonoma State University, 1985), 1-2.
1
2
Division of Beaches and Parks and the Division of Recreation), which had been
established in 1967 under State Liaison Officer (and future SHPO) William Penn Mott,
Jr., was chosen to administer the new federal preservation program at the state level.2
In 1973 and 1976, the SHPO’s staff implemented large initial surveys to identify
and evaluate historic resources located in California, followed by workshops held in
counties to establish county historic advisory committees or heritage commissions. These
county bodies selected liaisons to review historical evaluation survey forms and submit
them to the SHPO. By March of 1975, over 25,000 historical resources were listed in the
state’s inventory.
Later that year, discussions held between the Office of Historic Preservation
(OHP) and the National Park Service resulted in the incorporation of many of the Park
Service’s suggestions regarding the thematic categorization of the state’s historical
resource inventory. The Department of Parks and Recreation later decided that the OHP
should assume full control of all survey and inventory management responsibilities.3
In addition to the inventory of historic resources managed by the OHP, several
members of the Society for California Archaeology (SCA) saw the need for a statewide
inventory of archaeological resources. The broad language of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 related to environmental project review raised concerns
regarding the management of archaeological data, as did the University of California’s
2
Nadine Ishitani Hata, The Historic Preservation Movement in California: 1940-1976
(Sacramento: Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation, 1992), 127-128.
3
Ibid., 155-158.
3
concurrent reduction of the scope of the Archaeological Survey Offices at Berkeley and
Los Angeles. The adoption of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in 1970
applied to all public and private development projects in the state, legislating a more
robust environmental review process at the state level. These events lead to the
establishment of the SCA District Clearinghouses, which replaced the former individual
District Archaeologists that had previously been in charge of maintaining the inventory.
The title of District Clearinghouse Coordinator was established by the SCA President in
1974, which would later become the title of CHRIS Information Center Coordinator that
is currently in use.
The State of California Resources Agency established the state Archaeological
Sites Survey in 1976, along with state funding for fifteen Regional Offices. The majority
of these Regional Offices inherited contractual agreements between the same universities
where District Clearinghouse Coordinators had maintained the state’s archaeological
inventory. In 1977, the Clearinghouses’ responsibilities were officially expanded to
include the creation and maintenance of a statewide inventory of archaeological survey
reports; new duties also included maintaining a referral list of archaeological
consultants.4
It remains unclear exactly when the term “information center” was first applied to
former SCA District Clearinghouses, or when the term “California Historical Resources
4
Paul Chace, A White Paper on SCA District Clearinghouses, Their Creation, Current Status, and
Recommendations for the Future (Rohnert Park: California Archaeological Inventory, Northwest
Information Center, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University, 1978) 1-4.
4
Information System” was first established (though it appears to have been between 1985
and 1997, according to reviewed historical sources). The label of “information center”
seems to have been applied liberally in many sources during the period immediately
following the Friends of Mammoth court ruling in 1972, which found CEQA applicable
to all undertakings that are approved by local government agencies in California
(previously only applicable to undertakings approved by state government). A few
months after the ruling, the state decided to regionalize the administration of all cultural
resource records, and the SCA Clearinghouses effectively became state “information
centers.” A few months after the state took charge of the information centers, the
responsibility of administering the information center system was given to the OHP.5
Once the administration of the new information centers was transferred to the
OHP, the centers were tasked with cataloging the state’s historic-era resource records,
including historic buildings, historic mining resources, historic linear and engineering
features such as roads, trails, canals, railroads, and bridges, and the documentation of
historic districts, as well as the state’s collections of historic survey reports initiated as a
result of environmental review legislation such as NEPA, CEQA, and Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act. With respect to their relationships to host institutions,
and in their primary purpose of maintaining the state’s inventory of cultural resource
records and survey reports, the current CHRIS information centers mirror the previous
SCA District Clearing Houses. The information centers have developed into non-profit
David A. Frederickson, “Archaeological Data Management in California: History and Function of
the Information Center System” (Rohnert Park: Sonoma State University, 1985), 5.
5
5
auxiliaries of the OHP, and help to fulfill the OHP’s duties regarding the maintenance
distribution of cultural resources data as legislated by the NHPA.
Implementation of a Geographic Information System
In 1997, the Anthropological Studies Center at Sonoma State University and
Psomas and Associates held an audit of the CHRIS due to the initiation of the Mojave
Desert Historical Resources Geographic Information System (MDHRGIS) that involved
disseminating CHRIS data pertinent to the development of the Mojave Desert Ecosystem
Database Program. This program would enable military units to train critical mission
skills in the Mojave Desert while preserving the environment, including the state’s
cultural resources in the area. Prior to the audit, most information centers had not made
any attempt to explore the possibility of establishing a GIS due to the financial
constraints of acquiring new technology, as well as lack of sufficient training among IC
staff in the use of GIS software. The audit report stated that “Implementation of the
MDHRGIS Project will be the largest venture into GIS for the CHRIS. This project is of
such magnitude that it will fundamentally affect how all the ICs operate in the future…
the standards and procedures established will be the basis for future GIS projects.” The
report raised issues of funding the implementation of the GIS, and how it might affect
6
information center operations in the future. These issues remain relevant to the CHRIS
today.6
While the MDHRGIS project did not spearhead the CHRIS into the
implementation of a comprehensive, internet-based GIS, it did bring the consideration of
a system-wide GIS standard to the forefront of CHRIS policy discussions. The disparate
nature of the information centers’ budgetary environments and staffing availabilities
caused each facility to implement a GIS program as dictated by fiscal prudence and the
necessities of regional clients.
The earliest features included in the North Central Information Center’s (NCIC)
GIS were plotted in 2006. The NCIC contracted the Prison Inmate Authority to complete
a large amount of initial digitization in a cost-saving effort, however due to difficulties in
communicating the correct methodology of interpreting the data on the information
center inventory base maps, much of the data was found to be inaccurate; currently it is
gradually being corrected as part of the ongoing digitization project and implementation
of electronic records searches. NCIC staff determined that in order to correctly plot a
survey, a copy of the report that defined the location and methodology of the survey is
necessary. This data has been quality-control checked for all of the resources in the
NCIC’s GIS, but a large amount of unchecked data remains in the survey portion.
6
Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, and Psomas and Associates, Audit
Report of the California Historical Resources Information System in Support of The Mojave Desert
Historical Resources GIS Project (Sacramento: Office of Historic Preservation, 1997), i, 19.
7
The NCIC’s GIS inventory has expanded according to the needs of the OHP, and
now includes a large number of historic properties that were previously housed
exclusively at the OHP as part of the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI). These HRI
properties have been implemented into the CHRIS library system, and are available for
users to query as part of cultural resource record searches. With the implementation of
the HRI records, the NCIC currently has nearly 25,000 cultural resource records in its
database and GIS, and over 11,000 cultural resource survey reports. This number will
continue to increase as new records are continuously submitted to the NCIC.
Operational Overview of the NCIC
The NCIC maintains and disseminates information on cultural resources and
survey reports located within six California counties: Amador, El Dorado, Nevada,
Placer, Sacramento, and Yuba. There are many different types of prehistoric
archaeological sites, historic archaeological sites, historic engineering structures, and
historic buildings in the region. The NCIC provides clients with detailed information
about historic and prehistoric activities within requested search areas; clients also receive
detailed GIS maps depicting the locations of known resources and completed surveys.
Clients request cultural resource information for a variety of purposes: Clients
request cultural resource information for a variety of purposes: public and private sector
developers seek to comply with local, state, and federal environmental review policies,
8
private land owners compile research on their properties, Native American tribes track
and maintain their own inventories, and disaster responders such as CAL FIRE seek to
minimize the destruction of cultural resources in emergencies. The NCIC is also open to
students for research purposes. In order to access confidential information, a student must
have the verification of a university faculty member, just as other clients must meet the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in Archaeology, History,
Historic Architecture, and History.7
Clients are able to set a variety of parameters for their requests so that they only
receive the desired materials to meet their review needs and/or financial constraints.
Clients can request to narrow their search based on resource age and resource and survey
date of recordation, and can choose what information is included or omitted, such as
historic maps, a review of several inventories (such as the National Register of Historic
Places and the California Inventory of Historic Resources), and ethnographic and historic
literature related to the requested search area. Clients are also able to prioritize their
search requests for an additional fee, as is often the case for events such as fire
emergencies, or immediately impending projects. As a result of open dialogue with
clients, the NCIC staff has concluded that the digital dissemination of data through a GIS,
information database, and Adobe PDF documents is the preferred method.
7
Part 61.
National Park Service, Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Professional Qualifications, 36CFR
9
CHAPTER 2. THE IMPORTANCE OF DIGITIZATION
How Digitization Aids the Operations of the NCIC
Before the digitization of the state’s inventory of cultural resource records and
surveys was initiated, information center staff was forced to use paper records and maps
that had to be catalogued in a variety of reference materials in order to be made available
to clients and staff for cultural resource records searches. This dynamic did not allow the
staff a fast and efficient method to query and assemble sets of records for clients.
All resources and reports previously had to be mapped by hand by the staff, and
maps depicting USGS 7.5’ quadrangles such as Clarksville, Folsom, and Sacramento East
became so populated with depictions of resources and surveys, they became nearly
unusable, despite the use of multiple maps to depict the same areas. This problem is
especially apparent in areas where dozens of studies might overlap one another.
Moreover, changes to records had to be recorded independently from the actual execution
of the changes to the physical records themselves: whenever a change was made it had to
be recorded in all other references that listed the information center library numbers and
trinomial identifiers (a trinomial identifier a national standard for the identification of
archaeological sites, set by the Smithsonian Institute, denoted by state and county codes,
followed by an inventory number and type indicator, such as CA-SAC-308H, where the
10
“H” represents “historic”). Separate lists had to be maintained for library assignment
logs, voided numbers, unprocessed records, and backlogged records. Hard-copies of
resource records had to be stored in large binders, filling a large amount of shelf space.
Resources that were assigned trinomials had to be catalogued separately from those that
only received primary numbers for the convenience of clients, but created a burden for
the staff during routine processing and records search activities.
With the implementation of the CHRIS digitization plan, information center staff
can now query lists of records through the CHRIS database application seamlessly. A
variety of options exist for answering specific questions about figures related to record
types, ages, authors, location data, etc. During the processing of records, actions such as
the combination of previously separate resource records and library numbers can now be
done with a simple note in the destination record’s metadata via a few keystrokes without
the need to record the event in a variety of reference materials. Records can be scanned
into PDF format, and then placed into a digital file repository where they can be accessed
and copied through the database application.
Streamlining the processing procedures has allowed the staff at the NCIC to
completely eliminate the previous backlog of incoming records, and the staff can now
process updated records the moment they are delivered to the facility. The convenience of
electronic processing frees more staff time for the continued quality control assessment of
previously digitized data and performs records searches. The database application allows
all the pertinent information from a record to be quickly entered into a straightforward
11
electronic reference format that can be almost instantaneously pulled up whenever
required. The database also eliminates the need to pull hard-copy records from the many
shelves housed at the facility. When the NCIC receives specific requests, such as
information on a specific record or set of records, staff can easily query the record(s) and
provide the client with the information they need.
The process of mapping record locations has been streamlined as well. The
creation of a GIS interface that caters specifically to the NCIC’s needs allows for fast and
efficient plotting of newly submitted records, as well as updates to previous record
locations; it also allows for the input of relevant location and identification information.
Records are scanned into the NCIC’s PDF record library as they are processed. This
allows staff to access the record’s location or sketch map without leaving their
workstation. This was a key factor in the rapid plotting of the majority of the NCIC’s
resource records into the GIS.
The increasing reliance on digital interfaces and record access has helped to
decrease the cost of materials for the NCIC. Xerox computer pages are no longer
necessary for the fulfillment of records searches for most clients, which cuts back on
toner purchases and copy fees. Most records searches can be done entirely electronically,
usually sent as a batch of PDF files that include GIS maps, copies of records, listings,
historic maps, historic and ethnographic literature, and spreadsheets can all be included
with a few mouse clicks due to the interconnected functionality of the database and GIS
applications.
12
The use of digital records and computer software to perform records searches
dramatically cuts back on the required staff time, providing more time to focus on other
tasks such as the remaining quality control maintenance of the survey data performed by
the Prison Inmate Authority. This has improved the relationships of the IC with many of
its clients, as long turnaround times for searches and the lack of a digital alternative was
previously one of the most consistent complaints from clients.
How Digitization Aids the Clients of the NCIC
As noted above, prior to the near-completion of digitization of the information
center’s inventory, the most consistent complaint from clients involved the lengthy
turnaround times for records searches that made it difficult for consultants to bid on
projects that require records searches with no solid estimate regarding the completion
time for project review submittal. The digital records search process and streamlined
records processing has allowed some NCIC staff to devote the majority of their time to
fulfilling records searches, which leads to quick turnaround times (usually within a few
days, depending on the size of the request queue). This allows consultants to bid on
projects with more confidence that the records searches will be ready by their deadlines,
and to bid on a greater overall number of projects.
Clients who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Professional
Qualifications are free to visit the NCIC facility and perform records searches themselves
13
under a reduced fee structure. As mentioned in the previous section, some of these inhouse records searches are virtually impossible to perform given the severely congested
state of some of the NCIC’s base maps. Clients have also been forced to continue to pull
hard-copy records from the shelves, and manually write their own lists of records, copies
made, etc. The NCIC is currently in the process of establishing a client GIS and database
interface with restrictions on editing privileges, so that clients can essentially use the
same tools as the staff uses to perform records searches, but are unable to modify the
data. This will allow clients to fulfill their own records searches in a faster and more
efficient manner when they choose to visit the facility.
When clients submit records search requests to the IC, the creation of a digital
product allows for far more efficient methods of delivery. A digital records search
package can be recorded on a compact disc, eliminating the inconvenience of receiving
possibly hundreds of printed pages in a variety of envelopes and boxes in favor of a
simple envelope with a disc enclosed. Clients also have the option to request that records
searches be sent via secure file transfer protocol (FTP), enabling them to receive the
results instantly upon transmittal. As more cultural resources management professionals
become familiar with the way in which computer technology can streamline their work
process, this method of delivery will likely become the standard due to its unmatched
convenience and speed. Records searches that include confidential locational information
are encrypted before they are transmitted to the client.
14
As briefly mentioned in the previous section, if a client needs to request specific
records, specific information regarding an area, or information regarding a previous
records search, the digitization of the NCIC’s records allows the staff to almost
instantaneously locate the information, while also providing the aforementioned delivery
options.
The creation of a streamlined digital product, and the ability to perform in-house
digital records searches, is a great benefit to the clients of the NCIC. Functionality will
only continue to improve as both IC staff and their clients become more familiar with the
process, and discover new ways to further improve it. The completion of the digitization
project is arguably the most critical component of the modernization and standardization
of the CHRIS.
15
CHAPTER 3. PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
Access to CHRIS Data
CHRIS data falls into two categories: confidential (not for publication) and
unrestricted data. The public is free to visit any CHRIS facility and access unrestricted
data, including but not limited to most records on the historic built environment and
various historic building surveys. Fees will still apply, and an individual must have an
information center staff member obtain records for them from the database or the shelves.
It is the responsibility of the information center staff to prevent unauthorized access to
confidential data when individuals who do not qualify for access to confidential data visit
the facility.
Individuals who wish to access confidential data must meet the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for Professional Qualifications in one of the applicable fields, or
need to be officially authorized as a conditional user under the Access and Use
Agreement of a professional who meets the Standards. Confidential data may include any
information on prehistoric Native American archaeological resources, historic mining
resources, and prehistoric and historic debris. The Access and Use Agreement is a legally
binding contract between the CHRIS and employers with at least one individual on staff
who meets the Standards for Professional Qualifications. The agreement stipulates that
16
confidential information received by the user will not be shared with any party that is
neither an authorized nor conditional user under the applicable Access and Use
Agreement. The CHRIS has implemented an online tracking system that delineates active
Access and Use Agreements, as well as any authorized and conditional users that have
been added to the Agreement. It is the responsibility of the information center staff to
verify that an individual who submits a data request is employed by an entity that has an
Access and Use Agreement in place, and that the individual is either an authorized or
conditional user listed under the Access and Use Agreement. When initially entering
Access and Use Agreements and users into the tracker, it is the staff’s responsibility to
verify that all of the required paperwork has been submitted to obtain access, and that any
authorized users meet the Standards for Professional Qualifications. With the
implementation of online data transmittals, it is crucial that staff verify who will have
access to the data once it has been received, and that the staff communicates to the client
precisely who is authorized to view confidential data to maintain the integrity of the
locations of California’s cultural resources.
Security Measures
With the conversion of CHRIS data to a digital format, it is increasingly important
that appropriate security measures be taken to protect the data from potential theft and/or
destruction. At the NCIC, digital data is stored on a secure file share located in the CSUS
17
campus Data Center and is administered under a service contract with the University’s
Information Resource Technology Department (IRT), which considers the data to be of
“Tier 1” importance (a designation meaning that it requires the highest level of security
measures). The file share backs up automatically any time data is written or modified,
and creates restore points in case of accidental data deletion. Access to the file share is
governed by authorized user accounts administered by the campus IRT, and can only be
requested by the IC Coordinator. An additional encrypted backup is stored in a locked,
fireproof and waterproof safe in the facility.
The NCIC adheres to security policies set forth by the Department of Parks and
Recreation. No confidential data may be sent via e-mail, regardless of the implementation
of encryption methods. Only sensitivity letters that do not include any confidential data or
unrestricted records may be transmitted via e-mail, or sent through an online data
transmittal service.
Clients are informed that NCIC staff may observe them for purposes of data
security as they complete in-house records searches. If a staff member believes that a
client is making an attempt to circumvent CHRIS Access and Use policies, the staff
member has the right to ask the client to leave. Future access is then determined after a
review of the incident.
18
Quality Control Standards
IC staff must adhere to the CHRIS Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Standards. GIS and database entries must be verified for accuracy. Accuracy of GIS
representation of locational data is vital, and should be cross-checked with the source
record (see Appendix A for more information). If the location of a feature is plotted even
slightly incorrectly, it could mean the difference between the record being included or
omitted from a requested search area.
Updated resource record location data, if determined to be of high quality,
supersedes the original record(s) and the GIS feature relating to the record will be
overwritten. Whenever possible, only the GIS coordinator should append GIS data into
the main dataset, and only after verifying that the location has been plotted correctly and
the correct attribute data has been entered for the resulting feature. The GIS coordinator
should run routine checks on the main dataset to verify consistency and correctness. If
errors are found, they must be fixed immediately.
The Future of Digital Access
The goal of the digitization plan is to completely digitize the data at all ten
CHRIS information centers under the guidelines of an established uniform standard, so
that digital products produced by the various information centers are presented to clients
19
in a uniform manner. The data will then be integrated into a single dataset, and an online
infrastructure will be established to house the entire set of CHRIS digital data. This
online infrastructure will be accessible by clients, largely freeing the information center
staffs to concentrate on the inventory maintenance. Many clients will continue to require
assistance performing records searches despite the online database due to a lack of
technical expertise, but the availability of online access, complete with toolsets, will
drastically reduce the overall need for staff-performed records searches. It is difficult to
say how this dynamic could alter CHRIS facilities, but a future reduction in the number
of facilities is a probable outcome. Without the need for multiple regional centers, the
CHRIS will likely be centralized at a single inventory maintenance facility. Some states,
such as Arizona, already have such an infrastructure in place, though it should be noted
that the number of cultural resources located in California is substantially larger than that
of most other states.
The CHRIS has adapted to the many changes in the landscape of cultural resource
management and heritage preservation over the past few decades, and will certainly
continue to do so; there will always be a need for cultural resources professionals with
expertise related to specific regions. The system provides an invaluable service for the
continued management California’s cultural resources.
20
Appendix A. Digitization of Documents Submitted to the Information Center
During my time at the NCIC, I have successfully plotted thousands of records into
the GIS according to the CHRIS Quality Assurance and Quality Control Standards. The
digitization of the NCIC’s library is complete, only requiring additional quality control in
a few select areas. The appendices detail the process of digitizing NCIC resource records
and survey reports, and how these digital records are used to complete cultural resource
records searches.
Once a resource or report that has been submitted to the information center has
been given an NCIC library number (and if determined appropriate, a trinomial identifier
for qualifying resource records), the record is then scanned (unless it has already been
submitted in a digital format) and added to the NCIC’s collection of PDF files.
Applicable location, attribute, and metadata are then manually imported into the
Microsoft Access-based CHRIS database application, where it can be queried for use.
Attributes such as the type of resource or study, the date(s) and author(s) of recordation,
the size of the resource or acreage of the study, any confidentiality considerations, and
the relative or exact age of the resource or study are entered into the database for
reference and query purposes. Resource records are cross-referenced with their respective
reports, allowing the user to determine which resources were recorded as a result of a
21
particular study. See Illustrations 1A-1F for a visual example of the process of the
entering a resource record into the CHRIS database application, and illustrations 2A-2F
for an example of entering report record.
22
All Illustrations in Appendices A and B Depict the Following Software:
Esri ArcGIS, Version 10.1
Microsoft Access 10
Adobe Acrobat 11
©2004-2012
Esri
© 2010
Microsoft Corporation
© 2012
Adobe Systems, Inc.
23
Example of Entering a Resource Record into the CHRIS Database Application
Illustration 1A. Database listings for the NCIC’s library of resource records. Portions of
the selected database entry will appear in subsequent illustrations.
24
Illustration 1B. Attributes imported from the resource’s Department of Parks and
Recreation DPR23 forms: type of resource, age, and method of survey for recordation.
25
Illustration 1C. Recordation: author of record(s), the author’s affiliation (employer),
date of recordation, and survey reports that feature the resource.
26
Illustration 1D. Locational data imported from the resource record: USGS 7.5’
quadrangle, address, APN, Public Land Survey information, and UTM coordinates.
27
Illustration 1E. Database entry metadata: date of modifications and name of the staff
member who modified the entry.
28
Illustration 1F. Source record for the above database entry (DPR 523 form).
29
30
Example of Entering a Report Record into the CHRIS Database Application
Illustration 2A. Database listings for the NCIC’s library of survey report records.
Portions of the selected database entry will appear in subsequent illustrations.
31
Illustration 2B. Citation information: including the author(s) of the survey report, the
date the report was completed, the title, the employer of the author(s), the client who
contracted the report, the acreage covered by the survey, the number of resources
associated with the report, the number of pages, collections made (if any), and the
disclosure status.
32
Illustration 2C. List of resources associated with the survey report, with links to the
resources’ PDF records.
33
Illustration 2D. Locational data of the survey: county, USGS 7.5’ quadrangle, address,
APN, and Public Land Survey information.
34
Illustration 2E. Database entry metadata: date of modifications and name of the staff
member who modified the entry.
35
Illustration 2F. Title page of report.
36
Once the pertinent information has been imported from a record into the CHRIS
database application, the direct locational data, any included maps, and if necessary any
descriptive information about the location is used to plot the record into the NCIC’s GIS.
Resource records should have an accompanying USGS topographic map depicting the
resource’s footprint, but in the event that a map has not been included, the NCIC staff
must attempt to discern the location and size of the resource from the sketch map (if
included), any supplied location data such as UTM coordinates, Township Section and
Range, U.S. postal address, aerial photographs, or written descriptions. If an exact
location cannot be determined, the IC staff will use their best estimate based on the
aforementioned information to plot the resource, and will make a note that the resource
locations should be considered “informal”. See Illustrations 3A-3G for a visual example
of the process of plotting of a resource record into the GIS.
For a cultural resources survey report, the methodology of the survey must be
determined first, which can be found within the text of the report. For an archaeological
survey, transects spaced no more than fifty meters apart should be applied during the
survey to qualify for plotting into the GIS (typically “intensive” coverage refers to
transects spaced no more than thirty meters apart, while “general coverage” can denote
up to a fifty meter transect spacing. NCIC staff must make note of any mixed coverage
types depicted on any included maps when deciding what portion of the study qualifies
for digitization. See Illustrations 4A-4F for a visual example of the process of plotting of
37
a report record into the GIS. If no survey occurred, a note is made in the metadata of the
database entry that no survey could be plotted for that record.
38
Plotting a Resource Record into the GIS (red text added for demonstration
purposes)
Illustration 3A. The record for IC library number P-34-001514, also identified as
“Structure 6” on the resource’s DPR 523 Historic Resource Inventory form (Illustration
1F), is located on the USGS Florin 7.5’ Quadrangle. The quadrangle has been highlighted
in red in the data frame.
39
Illustration 3B. The map image has been magnified, rendering the layer containing the
USGS quadrangle images visible. Florin Road, the Central California Traction Railroad,
and Bradshaw Road are located in the area, which are identified on the resource record
sketch map. The “measure” tool has been selected to determine a 1.2 mile distance east of
the intersection of the Railroad and Florin Road, on the south side of Florin Road, as
dictated by the location data in the resource record.
40
Illustration 3C. The distance has been measured, and the location depicted on the
resource record has been determined.
41
Illustration 3D. The resource has been plotted into the GIS. A point has been determined
as the most practical representation for the footprint of single structures.
42
Illustration 3E. Multiple resources plotted in the area. P-34-700 is a historic road
segment, and P-34-000464 is an area covered with the remains of several historic
structures. Note the different feature classes used to express the footprint of each
resource: points, lines, and polygons.
43
Illustration 3F. Once a resource record has been plotted, the resulting feature receives
coded attributes and metadata regarding the creation of the shape, including the staff
initials, the information center that owns the feature, the date the feature was plotted into
the GIS, the information center library number, and (if applicable) trinomial numbers.
Once the feature for a report has been plotted and the appropriate attributes have been
entered, the edits to the GIS are either saved into the main GIS dataset by the GIS
coordinator, or saved on a template by other NCIC staff to be appended.
44
Illustration 3G. Selected pages from source record for Attribute Table (Illustration 3F)
45
46
47
48
Plotting a Report Record into the GIS
Illustration 4A. Title page for Report 2522.
49
Illustration 4B. This page describes the methodology used in the survey conducted for
Report 2522.The underlined text shows that ten meter transects were used to conduct the
survey.
50
Illustration 4C. A map depicting the survey area for Report 2522.
51
Illustration 4D. Because the methodology of the survey has met the acceptable standard,
t he survey is plotted into the GIS according to the map from the original record.
52
Illustration 4E. Attribute data for Report 2522 feature. Once the feature for a report has
been plotted and the appropriate attributes have been entered, the edits to the GIS are
either saved into the main GIS dataset by the GIS coordinator, or saved on a template by
other IC staff to be appended.
53
Illustration 4F. Multiple surveys plotted in the area. Report 7008 is a survey conducted
due to a cell tower site, and Report 9188 is a survey conducted by due to maintenance on
transmission lines. Note the different feature classes used to depict the footprint of the
various types of surveys: points, lines, and polygons.
54
Appendix B. Creation of Digitized Products for Clients
Clients can request cultural resource records searches by submitting a CHRIS data
request form (available from the California Office of Historic Preservation website at
ohp.parks.ca.gov) as well as a map of the requested search area to the applicable
information center. See Illustration 5A to view a copy of the form (August 2013 version).
The data request form allows clients to specify a variety of parameters for a records
search, including cost limits, priority level of the search, buffer radii, types of cultural
resource and study data desired, inclusion of historical maps, historical and ethnographic
literature, the consultation of various types of historic inventories, and a choice between
GIS created maps or the purchase of GIS shapefiles. Standard data requests are usually
submitted by private consulting firms acting on the behalf of land and commercial
developers or government agencies, or directly by government agencies.
In addition to the standard CHRIS data request form, the CHRIS also offers
clients the option to request a cultural resources sensitivity letter. The letter explains the
prehistoric and historic contexts of the requested search area, and explains how those
contexts may affect the area’s sensitivity for the discovery of previously unrecorded
cultural resources. Requests for sensitivity letters are usually requested by the U.S.
Forestry Service, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and by local
government and private planning firms.
55
The continued digitization of the CHRIS inventory has streamlined the records
search process by providing critical tools for the querying of records and GIS features
under a variety of requested parameters, and allowed for streamlined delivery methods as
detailed in Chapter 2. See illustrations 5B-5H for a visual example of a computer assisted
CHRIS records search.
56
Illustration 5A. The standard CHRIS data request form.
57
58
59
Illustration 5B. The area includes the location of three historic resources and three
surveys.
60
Illustration 5C. A sample records search area is plotted on the in the GIS.
61
Illustration 5D. The desired features to be included in the search are selected, and a
search radius of .25 miles is applied.
62
Illustration 5E. The IC Tools custom toolbar (created by Jay King of Far Western
Anthropological research Group, Inc.) is used to query the selection results. The tool
allows for the automated listing of resources and reports in the CHRIS database
application. Once the desired features have been queried, the tool is used to display only
those features that have been selected on in the GIS, temporarily filtering out the visual
representation of the rest of the data.
63
Illustration 5F. Only the resources have been selected and displayed, creating a clearly
discernible location map of the three resources in the area. Note that one of the resources
has been omitted from display due to its location outside the selected search radius.
64
Illustration 5G. Only the surveys have been selected and displayed, creating a clearly
discernible location map of the three surveys in the area. All three surveys are located
within the quarter mile search radius, so all three are displayed in the final search results.
65
Illustration 5H. Same as Illustration 1A. The CHRIS database application includes a
variety of functionality highlighted above, including the generation of simple and detailed
bibliographic listings which include the pertinent information from a resource or report
record, the ability to automatically import PDF copies of the records, the generation of
Microsoft Excel spreadsheets of the database entries, the ability to filter results based on
a variety of identifiers and attribute data (such as resource age, record author, resource or
survey type, age of resource or study, etc.), and the ability to annually filter results via
manual selection of individual records from the generated list.
66
Bibliography
Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, and Psomas and Associates.
Audit Report of the California Historical Resources Information System in
Support of The Mojave Desert Historical Resources GIS Project. Sacramento:
Office of Historic Preservation, 1997.
Chace, Paul. “A White Paper on SCA District Clearinghouses, Their Creation, Current
Status, and Recommendations for the Future.” Rohnert Park: California
Archaeological Inventory, Northwest Information Center, Department of
Anthropology, Sonoma State University, 1978.
Frederickson, David A. “Archaeological Data Management in California: History and
Function of the Information Center System.” Rohnert Park: Sonoma State
University, 1985.
Gerike, Christian. “A Source of Cultural Resource Information for Local Planning.”
Rohnert Park: California Archaeological Inventory, Northwest Information
Center, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University, 1988.
Hata, Nadine Ishitani. The Historic Preservation Movement in California: 1940-1976.
Sacramento: Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation,
1992.
Johnson, Ronald W., ed. and Michael G. Schene, ed. Cultural Resources Management.
Malabar: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Co., 1987.
King, Thomas F. Cultural Resources Laws and Practices. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press,
2004.
Secretary of the Interior, National Park Service. Secretary of Interior’s Standards for
Professional Qualifications. 36CFR Part 61
State of California. Resources Agency. Department of Parks and Recreation. Office of
Historic Preservation. California Historical Resources Information System
Information Center Rules of Operations Manual (Sacramento, 2012)