Waterbuffalo
02-13-2008, 08:36 PM
I wanted to apologize to Jeanne Harris for using a quote of mine from news stories and commentary I posted here at Clarkblog.org six months ago that was incorrect.
Paraphrasing a quote the quote she asked the Columbia RIver Crossing folks about the Indian Remains that were plagued what she thought was the Tacoma Narrows bridge. She had been corrected by the CRC/WashDOT staff that it was not that bridge but the 520 pontoo area off Port Angeles that was affected.
WashDOT was using the site to build cement pontoons that could be lowered into the lake where the Highway 520 is and build a new bridge in the area.
Here are two quotes and associated links to sources I found online:
"He reminded us that there are three major reasons to pay attention to possible archaeological sites. First, it's a good idea. Second, it's the law. And lastly, it can be ungodly expensive if you screw up. After the Washington State Department of Transportation undertook a hasty review of a drydock site near Port Angeles a few years ago, it found itself digging into the remains of an ancient Indian village and burial ground. WSDOT had to give up the project. The blunder cost them (us) $55 million, which, Leeds said, was a "high price to pay for a rare halibut hook of polished stone," one of the rare finds at the site."
Link: Near the end of the barn again story but linked here:
http://www.crosscut.com/tribes/6826/Barn+Again!/
Letter and story from the Lower Elwha/Klallam tribe about which this whole situation is about: http://www.soneighbors.org/Tribe's%20letter%20deepens%20dilemma%20over%20proj ect2.htm
This story is more indepth from the Seattle Times and would tell the story in the best way possible. So that our leaders down here in Vancouver can understand the story about what happened and why it might be important to the Fort Vancouver site where the new Columbia River Crossing is going to be built right next to it.
The situation is being dealt with Elson Strahan, local tribal representatives and Columbia River Crossing staff to minimize and not repeat such a big mistake as this was.
Paraphrasing a quote the quote she asked the Columbia RIver Crossing folks about the Indian Remains that were plagued what she thought was the Tacoma Narrows bridge. She had been corrected by the CRC/WashDOT staff that it was not that bridge but the 520 pontoo area off Port Angeles that was affected.
WashDOT was using the site to build cement pontoons that could be lowered into the lake where the Highway 520 is and build a new bridge in the area.
Here are two quotes and associated links to sources I found online:
"He reminded us that there are three major reasons to pay attention to possible archaeological sites. First, it's a good idea. Second, it's the law. And lastly, it can be ungodly expensive if you screw up. After the Washington State Department of Transportation undertook a hasty review of a drydock site near Port Angeles a few years ago, it found itself digging into the remains of an ancient Indian village and burial ground. WSDOT had to give up the project. The blunder cost them (us) $55 million, which, Leeds said, was a "high price to pay for a rare halibut hook of polished stone," one of the rare finds at the site."
Link: Near the end of the barn again story but linked here:
http://www.crosscut.com/tribes/6826/Barn+Again!/
Letter and story from the Lower Elwha/Klallam tribe about which this whole situation is about: http://www.soneighbors.org/Tribe's%20letter%20deepens%20dilemma%20over%20proj ect2.htm
This story is more indepth from the Seattle Times and would tell the story in the best way possible. So that our leaders down here in Vancouver can understand the story about what happened and why it might be important to the Fort Vancouver site where the new Columbia River Crossing is going to be built right next to it.
The situation is being dealt with Elson Strahan, local tribal representatives and Columbia River Crossing staff to minimize and not repeat such a big mistake as this was.