ROI104, Historic Preservation Plan for 20 ON 209, Ottawa National Forest, Michigan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under the National Historic Preservation Act as amended, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, 36CFR800, and 2360 of the Forest Service Manual, the Ottawa National Forest is directed to manage and maintain important historic properties listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 20 ON 209 is one such location and the following management plan outlines the significance of the site and management recommendations for long term maintenance. Site 20 ON 209 is located on the Ontonagon District of the Ottawa National Forest and is a Terminal Woodland Period archaeological site associated with prehistoric copper mining. It is a unique resource of the Ottawa National Forest and a rare example of prehistoric mining in the Upper Peninsula's Keweenaw region. As currently known, the site consists of three hundred mining pits and two workshop areas located adjacent to the East Branch of the Ontonagon River. Archaeological research conducted at the site in the 1990s revealed an intact deposit containing archaeological materials that date to A.D. 705 to 980. More recently, research conducted by Ball State University in 2017 further confirmed the site's integrity and geophysical surveys revealed buried features. The site has the potential to address a number of important issues for understanding the nature of prehistoric activities in the region as well as contributing to our understanding of acquisition and exchange of copper throughout eastern North America. After detailed analysis this document recommends the following management actions. We recommend 20 ON 209 qualifies for the National Register of Historic places under criterion A, C and D. Our archaeological research demonstrates the significance of prehistoric copper mining in the Upper Great Lakes Region, and its potential to yield more information on Terminal Woodland copper procurement. There are several issues that are potentially affecting the site and its integrity. The river is eroding away the river bank and potentially eating away at the site. Soil acidity is potentially corroding the copper artifacts within the site, possibly wiping away the material culture. Due to the lack of accessibility of 20 ON 209 and the importance of maintaining the natural appearance and primitive character of the Wild River Corridor. We recommend that standard subsurface archaeological survey be conducted to delineate site boundaries as well as determine the extent of related cultural activity in the area. Remote sensing technology should be used when possible to deter impact to 20 ON 209. We recommend a number of mapping and dating methods to address the research questions of site organization, structure, occupation, and soil chemistry. On-site interpretation is not recommended as the site is both difficult to access and increased visitation could further contribute to maintenance and preservation issues. Such visitation could also present opportunities for illegal looting. The goal of this plan is to enhance long term maintenance and preservation of a unique archaeological resource with the potential for public education and outreach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".