Climate Change Threatens Pacific Northwest Coast Heritage Sites

Climate Change Threatens Coastal Archaeological Sites

By Jes Burns | May 12, 2016

It’s the kind of foggy day you’d expect at Redwood National Park on the Northern California coast. The headlands are shrouded in mist and the gray-blue ocean churns against the shore. “This place is called Shin-yvslh-sri~ – the Summer Place,” says Suntayea Steinruck a member of the Tolowa Dee-ni’ Nation and Tribal Heritage Preservation Officer for Smith River Rancheria.

Her ancestors lived, hunted and fished around what used to be a small village on this site. “It has a name for a reason. Summer Place. We have that connection with the environment, knowing exactly where we come from,” she says from a bluff high above the ocean.

John Green is also Tolowa, a member of the Elk Valley Rancheria, and directly traces his family back to a village in the area. He says there were likely a small group of plank houses on this site, occupied by a few families. This spot was part of a network of Tolowa villages of different sizes and importance up and down the Southern Oregon and Northern California coastline. “You have everything here. But you got to remember that your land was out in the ocean a lot further than it is now. A lot of it has been washed away,” Green says.

This has been especially true in the past few decades. Redwood National Park Archeologist Michael Peterson says in this spot, the cliffs have retracted about three feet just since 2007. “This is a combination of everything bad: increasing climate change, increasing of terrific weather, storms,” Peterson says. “I’ve seen whole redwood logs lying up on top rocks that are like 12 feet above high tide area. You could tell how big the storm, the waves were.”

Erosion has been happening all along the Northwest coast for thousands of years. But recently there’s been a change in the intensity and frequency of coastal storms. “The whole acceleration has increased, and we’re definitely losing sites more rapidly,” says Rick Minor, an archeologist with Heritage Research Associates in Eugene, Oregon. Minor says archeologists in California are already beginning to come together to address the effects of climate change, but Oregon and Washington are lagging behind.

“And clearly if we don’t do something within next decade or so, we’re going to have a huge loss of sites,” he says.  …

Read the rest of this article:

See also:

US Approves Oil Drilling in Alaska Waters

US Approves Oil Drilling in Alaska Waters, Prompting Fears for Marine Life

Associated Press | July 13, 2017

An Italian multinational oil and gas company has received permission to move ahead with drilling plans in federal waters off Alaska which environmental campaigners say will endanger polar bears, bowhead whales and other marine mammals.

Late on Wednesday, the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management announced conditional approval of an exploratory drilling plan submitted by a US subsidiary of the company Eni.

The company plans to drill four exploration wells from the Spy Island drill site, an 11-acre artificial gravel island constructed in Alaska state waters 6-8ft deep. Spy Island is one of four artificial islands in the Beaufort Sea, off Alaska’s north coast, that support oil production.

Barack Obama last year banned oil and gas exploration in most of the Arctic Ocean. Donald Trump in April ordered the interior secretary, Ryan Zinke, to review the ban, with the goal of opening offshore areas. Environmental and Alaska Native groups sued to maintain it.

Environmental groups say potential spills put marine wildlife at risk. Eni’s leases would have expired at the end of 2017, said Kristen Monsell, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, in a prepared statement. Eni’s plan calls for extended-reach wells that could stretch more than six miles into federal waters.

The Trump administration provided the public only 21 days to review and comment on the exploration plan and only 10 days to comment on scoping for an environmental assessment, Monsell said. “Approving this Arctic drilling plan at the 11th hour makes a dangerous project even riskier,” Monsell said. “An oil spill here would do incredible damage, and it’d be impossible to clean up.” …

Read the rest of this article:

See also:

Trump Pushes Arctic Offshore Oil Opening

Trump to Press for Arctic Offshore Oil Opening

By Ben Lefebvre | April 27 2017

President Donald Trump will seek to open the Arctic waters for offshore oil and gas drilling, reversing President Barack Obama’s policy that prevented exploration in a region that environmental groups warn is too sensitive to risk an ecological catastrophe.

The move is Trump’s latest attempt to jettison Obama-era environmental policies and help open the spigot for U.S. oil and natural gas production, but is certain to draw legal challenges from environmental groups.

Trump will sign an executive order Friday that also orders his Department of Interior to review the five-year offshore leasing plan issued by the Obama administration, Interior Secretary Zinke told reporters. The study could take two years to conduct, and will look at the federal waters in parts of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean as well as Alaska’s Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea and Cook Inlet areas. …

Trump’s executive order will also direct the Commerce Department to review all marine sanctuaries created or expanded in the past 10 years and report back to the White House in three months. …

Read the rest of this article at Politico:

Arctic Climate Shifts to New State with “Profound Implications for People, Resources and Ecosystems Worldwide”

Arctic coastal communities
Circumpolar coastal human population distribution ca. 2009. Source:

Arctic Climate Warming Higher and Faster than Expected

By Margo McDiarmid | April 24, 2017

A new international report shows that Arctic temperatures are rising higher and faster than expected, and the effects are already being felt around the world.

“The Arctic’s climate is shifting to a new state,” warns the report.

“This transformation has profound implications for people, resources and ecosystems worldwide.”

The Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic assessment was written by more than 90 scientists from around the world who compiled the latest northern research on how climate change is affecting the Arctic ice and ecosystems.

It’s part of the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, which represents eight circumpolar countries.

Among the findings in this year’s report:

  • The Arctic Ocean could be largely free of sea ice in the summer as early as 2030 or even before that.
  • Arctic temperatures are rising twice as fast as the temperatures in the rest of the world. In the fall of 2016 mean temperatures were six degrees higher than average.
  • Thawing permafrost that holds 50 per cent of the world’s carbon is already affecting northern infrastructure and could release significant amounts of methane into the atmosphere.
  • Polar bears, walruses and seals that rely on ice for survival are facing increased stress and disruption.
  • Changes in the Arctic may be affecting weather as far away as Southeast Asia.

“The Arctic is connected to the rest of the planet,” said David Barber, who is a leading expert on Arctic ice at the University of Manitoba and one of the authors of the report.

“We are seeing the first and strongest signs of global warming in the Arctic. We knew this was coming, we knew 30 years ago that it was coming, and it is now here,” said Barber in an interview with CBC News. …

Read the rest of this article at CBC:

Whose Anthropocene? Revisiting Dipesh Chakrabarty’s “Four Theses”

Whose Anthropocene? Revisiting Dipesh Chakrabarty’s “Four Theses”

Edited by Robert Emmett and Thomas Lekan | 2016

Rachel Carson Center Perspectives | Transformations in Environment and Society

Introduction (excerpt from Emmett and Lakan 2016:7-8):
In his 2009 essay “The Climate of History: Four Theses,” the historian Dipesh Chakrabarty argued that anthropogenic climate change has signaled a fundamental shift in human history and human capacity. Once we have accepted the scientific evidence that human activities are re-shaping the Earth’s atmospheric patterns and geochemical cycles, he argues, we are compelled to recognize that human beings have, collectively, become a geophysical force capable of determining the course of climate for millions of years. A force of this magnitude is like the cyanobacteria that breathed oxygen into our atmosphere over 2.5 billion years ago, making life as we know it possible, or the asteroid that triggered the extinction of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. On such a scale, the narrow channeling of climate anxiety onto the technoscientific dimensions of a transition from fossil fuel-based sources of energy to renewables appears quaint. Chakrabarty argues that emergent forms of geological agency have driven a wedge into the continuity of human experience over time that undergirds historical understanding. With these ties to the past severed, human beings often find themselves lacking a useful account of collective experience that can guide future action.

The “Four Theses” has become a primary text for understanding the problematic nature of the Anthropocene as a cultural category, one that describes a collective, if unintended, human project whose implications extend far beyond geological inquiries about stratigraphic dating. Even as geologists continue to debate whether the Earth has indeed departed the Holocene, and if so, when, Chakrabarty has articulated what is at stake for our perception of human agency as a species when the timescales of human history become entangled in geological epochs. Reflecting on his “Four Theses” involves re-casting if not radically transforming the meaning of history and the purpose of humanities research in the age of global warming.

Chakrabarty has proposed four theses to understand the “deep contradiction and confusion” that climate change has produced for historical understanding. In this volume, Timothy J. LeCain compares the “Four Theses” to Martin Luther’s “Ninety-Five Theses” for their potential to disrupt both humanistic and natural-scientific knowledge. Chakrabarty does not merely challenge the way we go about doing historical research; he argues that because climate change collapses the distinction between natural history and human history, it calls us to abandon the dominant way in which we have conceptualized ourselves since the Enlightenment. The idea of the Anthropocene severely qualifies humanist histories of modernity and globalization, whether of the neoliberal, progressive, or Marxist variety. Its geological hypothesis requires us to put global histories of capital in conversation with the species history of humans, as colonial expansion and capitalist accumulation produced both historical inequalities and locked in future climate instability tied to humanity at the level of a global population. Considering species history and the history of capital together thus pushes us to the limits of historical understanding. Imagination and creativity take on renewed importance for navigating the currents of shared experience.

For historians interested in processes of globalization, decolonization, and environmental change, the “Four Theses” poses a concise challenge to phenomenological or hermeneutic understandings of the past, materialist analyses of capitalism, postcolonial understandings of the subaltern, and ecological histories that situate humans as biological agents. Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Chakrabarty argues, historians of all stripes assumed that the story of human affairs unfolded through acts of conscious self-reflection beyond the analytics of naturalistic explanation. Indeed, such assumptions about humans’ capacity for individual and collective self-fashioning ensured that considerations of freedom, rights, and struggles for emancipation have remained at the center of our historical imagination for the past 250 years, even when circumscribed by Karl Marx’s famous dictum that “men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.”


Foreword and Introduction
Robert Emmett and Thomas Lekan

Breaching the Divide: Human and Natural Histories
Heralding a New Humanism: The Radical Implications of Chakrabarty’s “Four Theses”
Timothy J. LeCain

Climate Change and the Confluence of Natural and Human History: A Lawyer’s Perspective
Josh Eagle

Human Niche Construction and the Anthropocene
Carol Boggs

Politics in/of the Anthropocene
The Geologic Challenge of the Anthropocene
Lori A. Ziolkowski

Rifts or Bridges? Ruptures and Continuities in Human-Environment Interactions
Jessica Barnes

Politics in—but not of—the Anthropocene
John M. Meyer

Species Capital: Consumption in the Anthropocene
Beyond Corporate Sustainability in the Anthropocene
Carol Hee

The Politics of Nature in the Anthropocene
Kathleen McAfee

Politics of Anthropocene Consumption: Dipesh Chakrabarty and Three College Courses
Laura A. Watt

Probing Our Limits
Narrative and the Geophysical Imagination Imagining Geological Agency: Storytelling in the Anthropocene
Alexa Weik von Mossner

Anthropocene Convergences: A Report from the Field
Lisa Sideris

The Crisis of Environmental Narrative in the Anthropocene
Daniel deB. Richter

Whose Anthropocene? A Response
Dipesh Chakrabarty

Download Whose Anthropocene?:

Read Dipesh Chakrabarty’s 2009 essay ‘The Climate of History: Four Theses’:

New ICHT Paper: Archaeology and the Late Modern State

Idiocracy skyline (Mike Judge/Idiocracy 2006)

Archaeology and the Late Modern State: Introduction to the Special Issue

By Richard Hutchings and Joshua Dent

While archaeologists have always shown great interest in the rise and fall of premodern states, they perennially show little interest in their own. This is particularly troubling because the state is the nexus of power in archaeology. In practice, virtually all archaeology is state archaeology, imbued with and emboldened by state power. It is in this light that contributors to this Special Issue of Archaeologies grapple with the archaeology–state nexus, addressing such timely issues as colonialism, capitalism, and cultural resource or heritage management (CRM/CHM). We outline here the archaeology–state nexus concept and introduce the Special Issue.

Tandis que les archéologues ont toujours fait preuve d’un intérêt marqué pour l’ascension et la chute des États prémodernes, ils n’en démontrent que rarement envers le leur. Cet état des choses est particulièrement troublant, car l’État est le lieu de convergence des pouvoirs en archéologie. Dans la pratique, presque toute l’archéologie est une archéologie d’État, imprégnée et enhardie par le pouvoir étatique. C’est donc dans cet état d’esprit que les contributeurs de ce numéro spécial d’Archaeologies débattent de la connexion entre l’État et l’archéologie en traitant d’enjeux opportuns, notamment le colonialisme, le capitalisme et la gestion des ressources ou du patrimoine culturels. Nous définissons ici le concept de la connexion entre l’État et l’archéologie et présentons le numéro spécial.

Aunque los arqueólogos siempre han mostrado un gran interés en el surgimiento y la caída de los estados premodernos, muestran incesantemente poco interés en sus propios estados. Esto es particularmente molesto porque el estado es el nexo de poder en la arqueología. En la práctica, virtualmente cualquier arqueología es arqueología del estado, imbuida con e incentivada por el poder estatal. Los que han contribuido a este Número Especial de Archaeologies tratan, desde este punto de vista, del nexo arqueología-estado, abordando temas tan oportunos como el colonialismo, el capitalismo y la gestión del patrimonio o de los recursos culturales (CRM/CHM, por sus siglas en inglés). Esbozamos aquí el concepto de nexo arqueología-estado y presentamos el Número Especial.

Key Words: Statecraft, Governance, Diplomacy, Bureaucracy, Cultural resource management, Indigenous heritage, Heritage crime

Read this paper:


Half of Iconic California Beaches Lost by 2100

Your Favorite California Beach May Disappear Too Soon

By Michael McLaughlin, March 27 2017

Much of Southern California’s iconic coastline, from Santa Barbara to San Diego, could be “completely eroded” due to rising sea levels by the end of the century, a new study predicts.

Between 31 and 67 percent of the iconic beaches, dunes and cliffs in the area may be washed away by 2100 thanks to climate change unless something’s done to protect the shores, according to the study published recently in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

“This is not a problem that’s going away,” said United States Geological Survey scientist Patrick Barnard, one of the co-authors. “But we can mitigate it.”

The question isn’t whether the seas are rising — it’s a matter of how much. Previous conservative estimates by a United Nations panel said the oceans would rise by 1 meter by the end of the 21st century, but newer data showing the accelerated melting of Antarctic ice may double that rate.

That’s a vital question for the 310 miles of Southern California the scientists examined. The region is home to nearly 20 million people and features some of the most desired real estate in the country, in places like the low-lying Westside neighborhoods of Los Angeles or suburban communities in Orange County.

Beaches provide the “first line of defense” against storms, Barnard said. If humans don’t intervene more decisively to counteract erosion, flooding will become more common and severe in places like LA’s Venice neighborhood, Barnard said. …

Read the rest of this article at:

Hawaii Drives Homeless from Tourist Areas

As Waikiki Moves Homeless Out of Tourist Zones, Some Fear Perpetual Displacement

By Liz Barney, March 29, 2017

Aguirre Dick used to spend the night in the streets and parks of Waikiki, the jewel of Hawaii’s tourism industry. But now, every evening, the homeless man must ride his bike three miles from the beach neighborhood and ascend the cinder slopes of a volcano to sleep – or risk arrest.

The homeless population in Waikiki has dropped by 83% over the past two years, according to a local nonprofit that provides homeless services in the area. While many have been housed, others say they have simply been pushed out, with unwanted implications for the rest of Honolulu.

A 2014 law made it illegal to sit or lie on public sidewalks in Waikiki, a move championed by a worried tourism industry. Visitors to the islands must reconcile their idea of a Pacific idyll with the highest per-capita rate of homelessness of any US state, and until recently the prime example was Waikiki.

But as other neighborhoods seek to copy Waikiki’s example, critics are concerned that homeless people could be forced into a state of perpetual displacement.

“The police told me get out of Waikiki, but they keep moving us around,” Dick said earlier this month. He was worried by rumors that police would move him on from his new sleeping place along the Diamond Head volcanic crater. “They’re trying to bury us.”

Waikiki is renowned for its pellucid water, high rises and luxury storefronts. According to recent data, the mile-long seaside stretch accounted for $7.3bn in tourism revenue in 2015, or 42% of Hawaii’s total tourism spending statewide. It is also responsible, based on 2010 numbers, for more than 30,000 local jobs.

But homelessness in Waikiki was the number one complaint among tourists before the sit-lie ban, according to the Hawaii Tourism Authority president, George Szigeti. “The sit-lie ban was needed in Waikiki,” Szigeti said, praising it for “virtually eliminating homelessness in most high-traffic areas”. …

Read the rest of this article at:

New Research in Heritage Crime and Violence

Three new publications on heritage crime and violence (scroll to bottom for all keywords):

Johan Brosché, Mattias Legnér, Joakim Kreutz & Akram Ijla (2016): Heritage Under Attack: Motives for Targeting Cultural Property During Armed Conflict, International Journal of Heritage Studies, doi:10.1080/13527258.2016.1261918
See also:–et-al–2016–heritage-under-attack-motives-for-targeting-cultural-property-during-armed-conflict.pdf

Abstract:  Although attacks on cultural property have caused international outcry, our understanding of this phenomenon is still limited. In particular, little research has been directed towards exploring the motivations for such attacks. Therefore, we ask: What are the motives for attacking sites, buildings or objects representing cultural heritage? By combining insights from peace and conflict research with findings from heritage studies we present a typology of motivations for attacking cultural property. We identify four, not mutually exclusive, broad groups of motives: (i) attacks related to conflict goals, in which cultural property is targeted because it is connected to the issue the warring parties are fighting over (ii), military-strategic attacks, in which the main motivation is to win tactical advantages in the conflict (iii), signalling attacks, in which cultural property is targeted as a low-risk target that signals the commitment of the aggressor, and (iv) economic incentives where cultural property provides funding for warring parties. Our typology offers a theoretical structure for research about why, when, and by whom, cultural property is targeted. This is not only likely to provide academic benefits, but also to contribute to the development of more effective tools for the protection of cultural property during armed conflict.
Keywords: Cultural heritage, cultural property, attacks, motives, armed conflict

Harold Kalman (2017): Destruction, Mitigation, and Reconciliation of Cultural Heritage, International Journal of Heritage Studies,

Abstract:  Attacks on built cultural heritage often occur during times of armed conflict. Many such acts are not collateral damage, but rather are deliberate and ideologically driven assaults intended to eradicate the adversary’s identity and collective memory. They represent ‘urbicide’ and ‘identicide’. The victims typically attempt to mitigate the loss, frequently by reconstructing the lost historic place and thereby restoring tangible evidence of their identity. Reconstruction, however, is itself an ideological act and a destructive activity, since it erases memories of the violence and removes physical evidence. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation has commemorated several cultural heritage sites that have been destroyed and subsequently reconstructed, by inscribing them on the World Heritage List. Although this ensures the perpetuation of their memory, it may distort the original purpose of the list as a celebration of ‘outstanding universal value’. Beyond commemoration, a desired outcome is reconciliation. True reconciliation requires the release of anger and pain, so that memories of the violence may be retained without a desire for retribution. This article looks at a selection of acts intended at destroying cultural heritage, including some that did not occur during war, and examines means and motives for achieving mitigation and reconciliation.
Keywords: Identicide, urbicide, destruction, reconstruction, mitigation, reconciliation, World Heritage List

Richard M. Hutchings & Marina La Salle (2017): Archaeology as State Heritage Crime, doi: 10.1007/s11759-017-9308-8
See also:

Abstract:  North American archaeology is evaluated in light of state and heritage crime theory. When analyzed with preexisting typologies, the practice is shown to meet the threshold for state-sanctioned heritage crime. This study also demonstrates how current models of heritage crime do not adequately account for (1) the pivotal role states and state-sanctioned heritage experts play in committing heritage crime and (2) the implications of heritage crime for living descendant communities, not just physical artifacts and buildings. Typically thought of as crime against the state, seeing a state heritage regime as organized heritage crime opens the door to a host of theoretical and practical possibilities, including legal remedies for affected communities. Despite these opportunities, major impediments to meaningful change exist.
Keywords: North American archaeology, cultural resource management, state crime, heritage crime, heritocide

All keywords+:


Armed conflict


Collateral damage

Cultural heritage

Cultural property

Cultural resource management

Descendant community






Heritage crime

Heritage regime








Organized heritage crime


Peace and conflict research



State crime

State-sanctioned heritage crime




World Heritage List


New ICHT Paper: Archaeology as State Heritage Crime

Archaeology as State Heritage Crime

By Richard M. Hutchings and Marina La Salle

Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress (2017)

Abstract: North American archaeology is evaluated in light of state and heritage crime theory. When analyzed with preexisting typologies, the practice is shown to meet the threshold for state-sanctioned heritage crime. This study also demonstrates how current models of heritage crime do not adequately account for (1) the pivotal role states and state-sanctioned heritage experts play in committing heritage crime and (2) the implications of heritage crime for living descendant communities, not just physical artifacts and buildings. Typically thought of as crime against the state, seeing a state heritage regime as organized heritage crime opens the door to a host of theoretical and practical possibilities, including legal remedies for affected communities. Despite these opportunities, major impediments to meaningful change exist.

Re´sume´: L’arche´ologie nord-ame´ricaine est e´value´e a` la lumie`re de la the´orie des crimes contre l’E´tat et le patrimoine. Lorsqu’elle est analyse´e a` l’aide de typologies pre´existantes, la pratique semble respecter le seuil en vigueur pour les crimes contre le patrimoine sanctionne´s par l’E´ tat. La pre´sente e´tude de´montre aussi comment les mode`les actuels d’examen des crimes contre le patrimoine ne tiennent pas ade´quatement compte (1) du roˆ le central que jouent les E´tats et les experts en patrimoine sanctionne´s par l’E´ tat en commettant des crimes contre le patrimoine; et (2) des implications que les crimes contre le patrimoine ont sur les communaute´s parentes vivantes et pas seulement sur les artefacts et baˆtiments physiques. Ge´ne´ralement conside´re´s comme des crimes contre l’E´tat, le fait d’associer un re´gime d’E´ tat commettant des crimes contre le patrimoine a` un re´seau de crimes organise´s ouvre la voie a` une gamme de possibilite´s the´oriques et pratiques, dont l’acce`s des communaute´s touche´es a` des recours en justice. Plusieurs obstacles d’envergure au changement existent pourtant malgre´ ces possibilite´s.

Resumen: La arqueologı´a norteamericana se evalu´ a a la luz de la teorı´a del estado y del crimen contra el patrimonio. Cuando se analizan con las tipologı´as preexistentes, se muestra que la pra´ctica satisface el umbral del crimen contra el patrimonio sancionado por el estado. El presente studio demuestra tambie´n co´mo los modelos actuales de crimen contra el patrimonio no explican de manera adecuada (1) el papel crucial que los estados y los expertos en patrimonio sancionados por el estado desempen˜ an en la comisio´n de crı´menes contra el patrimonio y (2) las implicaciones de los crı´menes contra el patrimonio para las comunidades de descendientes vivos, no so´ lo de artefactos fı´sicos y edificios. Visto normalmente como un crimen contra el estado, ver un re´gimen del patrimonio estatal como un crimen organizado contra el patrimonio abre la puerta a un monto´n de posibilidades teo´ ricas y pra´cticas, incluidos remedios legales para las comunidades afectadas. A pesar de estas oportunidades, existen impedimentos de importancia para un cambio significativo.

Key Words

North American archaeology, Cultural resource management, State crime, Heritage crime, Heritocide

Read this paper:


Call for Papers: Heritage Crime  Session | 2018 Association for Critical Heritage Studies Conference, Hangzhou, China