![National register of historic places plaque National register of historic places plaque](https://patch.com/img/cdn20/users/22949620/20190211/031140/styles/raw/public/processed_images/department_of_interior-1549915782-8935.jpg)
The home of the first U.S. president, President George Washington in Mount Vernon, Va., Monday, April 23, 2018. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
The National Register of Historic Places is the nation's official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation because of their significance in American life. This list is part of a federal program that coordinates and supports public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect our historic and archaeological assets.
ASSOCIATED PRESSSince instituted in 1966, the National Register of Historic Places has worked to protect the Nation’s many unique and irreplaceable historic resources. Recently proposed changes to the rules that govern how properties are added to that list, however, are causing concern among professional organizations that seek to help preserve the Nation’s cultural heritage. Since the proposed changes were announced, the Coalition for American Heritage, the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, and Preservation Action, and others, have voiced concerns about the affects these changes may have.
The National Register of Historic Places was created under the National Historical Preservation Act of 1966 and is officially maintained by the National Park Service. The purpose behind the creation of the list was to bring attention to sites of noted historic significance or in need of preservation; as well as to ensure that a broad cross section of the Nation’s material culture would be preserved. As a result, the list today includes a wide variety of historic sites, including not only famous buildings such President George Washington’s plantation Mount Vernon, but also the Coldwater Creek Covered Bridge in Alabama, and Cahokia, an important settlement built by Native Americans centuries before the Nation was founded.
The inclusion of a property on the register is in part symbolic, meant to raise awareness and highlight the importance of preserving irreplaceable pieces of the Nation’s past. Tax incentives, however, were added to legislation in the 1970s to encourage listing qualified sites. For some land owners, though, inclusion on the register is seen as inviting unwelcome public scrutiny.
The proposed changes to the Register specifically alter the ways in which sites are nominated and selected for inclusion. To address the concerns of private landowners, language has been added to allow “the owners of a majority of the land area in a proposed historic district” to block the inclusion of the district on the register. The proposed changes would also give the Federal government control over the nomination process for sites under the control of Federal agencies.
In their call to action, the Coalition for American Heritage notes that these changes are placing historic resources at risk. They note that currently a majority vote among property owners can stop the inclusion of their properties on the register, but under the new rules one land owner alone could overrule the consensus of the population of an entire district. They further note that by changing the rules for nominating properties controlled by Federal agencies that local organizations will be unable to advocate for sites within their own communities.
The Preservation Action organization noted that under current law private citizens and local governments have the right to appeal if a site is not included on the Register. With the proposed revisions, however, they suggest “that right will disappear if the property is federally owned and the agency objects.”
Yet more concerns have been raised regarding the effects that these rule changes could have on sites important to Native American peoples. In the proposed rule change, it is stated that “tribal consultation is not required because the rule will not have a substantial direct effect on federally recognized Indian tribes.” The National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers noted in a press release that “this claim is outrageous and fails to recognize that tribes often have substantial traditional cultural and ancestral connections to federal lands, and the proposed changes would adversely affect tribes’ ability to protect sacred and significant cultural sites.”
Additional statements advocating against the proposed rule changes have been issued by The National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, and the Society for American Archaeology.
The newly proposed rules are still under consideration and public comments can be submitted directly to the National Park Service and Department of the Interior via the Regulations.Gov website until April 30. The preservation of historic resources always requires a delicate balance between present day needs and ensuring that future generations will be able to learn from past. Not everything can be saved, but if we ignore the historic sites from our Nation’s past, generations of voices will fall silent.
'>The home of the first U.S. president, President George Washington in Mount Vernon, Va., Monday, April 23, 2018. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
ASSOCIATED PRESSSince instituted in 1966, the National Register of Historic Places has worked to protect the Nation’s many unique and irreplaceable historic resources. Recently proposed changes to the rules that govern how properties are added to that list, however, are causing concern among professional organizations that seek to help preserve the Nation’s cultural heritage. Since the proposed changes were announced, the Coalition for American Heritage, the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, and Preservation Action, and others, have voiced concerns about the affects these changes may have.
The National Register of Historic Places was created under the National Historical Preservation Act of 1966 and is officially maintained by the National Park Service. The purpose behind the creation of the list was to bring attention to sites of noted historic significance or in need of preservation; as well as to ensure that a broad cross section of the Nation’s material culture would be preserved. As a result, the list today includes a wide variety of historic sites, including not only famous buildings such President George Washington’s plantation Mount Vernon, but also the Coldwater Creek Covered Bridge in Alabama, and Cahokia, an important settlement built by Native Americans centuries before the Nation was founded.
The inclusion of a property on the register is in part symbolic, meant to raise awareness and highlight the importance of preserving irreplaceable pieces of the Nation’s past. Tax incentives, however, were added to legislation in the 1970s to encourage listing qualified sites. For some land owners, though, inclusion on the register is seen as inviting unwelcome public scrutiny.
The proposed changes to the Register specifically alter the ways in which sites are nominated and selected for inclusion. To address the concerns of private landowners, language has been added to allow “the owners of a majority of the land area in a proposed historic district” to block the inclusion of the district on the register. The proposed changes would also give the Federal government control over the nomination process for sites under the control of Federal agencies.
In their call to action, the Coalition for American Heritage notes that these changes are placing historic resources at risk. They note that currently a majority vote among property owners can stop the inclusion of their properties on the register, but under the new rules one land owner alone could overrule the consensus of the population of an entire district. They further note that by changing the rules for nominating properties controlled by Federal agencies that local organizations will be unable to advocate for sites within their own communities.
The Preservation Action organization noted that under current law private citizens and local governments have the right to appeal if a site is not included on the Register. With the proposed revisions, however, they suggest “that right will disappear if the property is federally owned and the agency objects.”
Yet more concerns have been raised regarding the effects that these rule changes could have on sites important to Native American peoples. In the proposed rule change, it is stated that “tribal consultation is not required because the rule will not have a substantial direct effect on federally recognized Indian tribes.” The National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers noted in a press release that “this claim is outrageous and fails to recognize that tribes often have substantial traditional cultural and ancestral connections to federal lands, and the proposed changes would adversely affect tribes’ ability to protect sacred and significant cultural sites.”
Additional statements advocating against the proposed rule changes have been issued by The National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, and the Society for American Archaeology.
The newly proposed rules are still under consideration and public comments can be submitted directly to the National Park Service and Department of the Interior via the Regulations.Gov website until April 30. The preservation of historic resources always requires a delicate balance between present day needs and ensuring that future generations will be able to learn from past. Not everything can be saved, but if we ignore the historic sites from our Nation’s past, generations of voices will fall silent.