Mississippi Administrative Code
Title 16 - History, Humanities and Arts
Part 3 - Historic Preservation Division
Chapter 12 - Mississippi Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations
Rule 16-3-12.14.0 - Alternative Mitigation

Current through September 24, 2024

While it could be argued that all mitigation should be "creative," the intent of this section is to make it clear that there is a nearly limitless range of possibilities to consider non-traditional mitigation approaches beyond the more typical approaches of archaeological data recovery for archaeological properties. Such non-standard, innovative approaches can provide solutions that are better for a project, and community and historic preservation goals, and can supplement or be done in place of, standard mitigation.

For example, instead of excavating a site that has been determined to have an adverse effect from a project, states have done regional models in areas with little or no archaeological site information in order to direct future surveys/research in those areas. A history of a neighborhood can be done to mitigate loss of a property. An article in a professional journal and/or a presentation at a conference could be done instead of a traditional mitigation report. Public education displays of artifacts from archaeological excavations are certainly always good to include in projects, whether as a result of data recovery or other excavations. Combinations of approaches like these should be considered.

A mitigation option could be the development of a local historic preservation plan and/or ordinance. A property could be purchased for preservation; an archaeological site could be preserved by including it in a conservation easement of some kind. Cultural resource management consultants should also consider the creative inclusion of key professionals or institutions with particular expertise, research or academic interests in the data recovery on the resource being mitigated. As an associate Principal Investigator on a project, these key professionals could be an asset in designing the approach, in the recognition of important resource attributes, refining background research, and aid in the preparation of a more meaningful final report. Establishing an exhibit in a local museum and/or creating a web site can be considered for both above and below ground resources in order to illustrate the importance of a historic property in a community's and/or region's historical development.

Another option that could be considered for certain situations, is the production of short films showcasing research being conducted and posting those short films on agency websites and on YouTube. Such short films could serve to inform the public and Section 106 Consulting Parties about project research, and enhance public education and public involvement activities. "Virtual artifact curation" is another use of recent technology that might be appropriate in certain instances for public education and public involvement opportunities. As with other mitigation measures discussed in this chapter, these two examples of use of recent technology could be combined with other mitigation approaches as appropriate for a project.

All alternative mitigation must be made in consultation with all involved parties such as the federal agency, SHPO and THPOs.

For more ideas, guidance or examples on alternative mitigations please see:

36CFR 800.6