INPCRP-L Archives

Archiver > INPCRP > 2003-12 > 1072288118


From: Ernie & Connie Lasley <>
Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Re: Fw: cemetery protection -- Indiana legislation
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 11:51:53 -0600
References: <be.1dd1c2c.2d1a0840@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <005d01c3ca40$60798440$425b75d8@computer>


I agree, Mark. This seems to go back to a discussion we had on here a
couple of years ago about the intent of the Historic Preservation and
Archeology Codes, in that some that were designed to prevent destruction of
pre-historic sites, the hunting of indian & pre-historic artifacts, etc.,
are wrongly being applied to cemeteries. I think we discussed that when
the "probing" issue surfaced.

The December 11, 1816 date used in the definition of "artifact" to me, is
intended to separate pre-historic sites, relics, artifacts etc. more
commonly associated with the indians and other pre-historic dwellers that
lived here hundreds and thousands of years ago from what we know as
"cemeteries". It fooks to me like if I want to merely straighten a stone
in a Pioneer Cemetery, with this proposed change I will be required to
first to submit an "archeological plan" and a "development plan" so I can
dig around the stone and level it.

I, too, question the true intent of this change, or if it has been well
thought out.

Ernie

At 12:07 PM 12/24/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>Seems to me that anyone who is involved with archaeology and is concerned
>with restoration of cemeteries would do their homework before trying to
>revise the law. The problem will be dealing with "interpretation" of the
>revision and WHO will determine the date that an "artifact" was produced.

This thread: