Hopewell Culture Amidst Ancient Monuments The Administrative History of Mound City Group National Monument / Hopewell Culture National Historical Park, Ohio

Interpretation or public education has enjoyed the bulk of fiscal and human resources at Mound City Group National Monument from the onset of the 1960s facility development era to the present. Within the Division of Interpretation and Resource Management, public education has historically overshadowed resources management. Seasonal staffing increases rival those for maintenance workers as the National Park Service seeks to educate the visiting public about the Hopewell culture, not only at the Mound City Group, but throughout Ross County, Southern Ohio, and the greater Midwest.

Superintendent Clyde B. King made it a point not only to be seen by visitors, but to contact them personally and endeavor to explain to them the significance of the mounds. In the summer of 1947, he reported contacting 1,262 out of 6,080 visitors in July. Outside of maintenance, King represented the only National Park Service employee trained to educate visitors. Like the consummate park ranger wearing the green and gray uniform, King took the responsibility to heart and made himself available at all times, including his days off. In the late fall, cold temperatures necessitated closing the unheated picnic shelter, but Clyde King still welcomed visitors who came to the residence to seek site information. [1]

The first crude mimeographed informational leaflet produced in the Region One Office was replaced in March 1948 with a new supply prepared by Clyde King. As news of the interpretive exhibits on display in the shelterhouse museum spread, a gratified Superintendent King greeted more and more visitors coming to the park seeking information, not recreation. Contacting almost half of the 1,200 visitors in November 1953, King noted that "It is not recognized by many that this is the only interpretive display in this section of country on this subject." In a not-too-veiled reference to the historical society in Columbus, he added, "By section, I refer to a broader field than even the state." [2]

King endeavored to deliver accurate information, incorporating current data into displays and interpretive folders. In early 1954, King himself researched and wrote "Indians of the Scioto Valley" with an eye toward having the narrative history substitute for a traditional park historical handbook. King made the document available for loan to students and teachers, and felt that with the addition of photographs and illustrations, it could one day be converted into a park handbook. Its availability soon sparked a demand by local academics, particularly by spokespersons preparing for group tours to the area. Conferring with Richmond officials in late 1953, King decided that interpretive materials include a separate self-guided trail sheet oriented from a single beginning point, rather than a more traditional marked tour route. This decision was based on the premise that the "mounds are so much alike." [3]

With facility developments in the early 1960s, came the decision to include a marked path for self-guided tours through the mounds for visitors who purchased a tour booklet produced by Eastern National Parks and Monuments Association. In the spring of 1963, the tour path was rerouted through the earthworks with tour guideposts repainted to reflect a uniform color scheme. In assessing the park's infant interpretive program, Regional Administrative Officer John J. Bachensky reported in late 1962 during a management inspection that the Park Service needed to ensure uniform interpretive information be "reflected in everything presented to the public." Bachensky criticized the bronze wayside exhibit "The Mound City Necropolis" produced by the Washington Office's museum division for depicting twenty-three burial mounds, not the twenty-four shown in site literature and other exhibits. [4]

Northeast Regional Director Ronald F. Lee approved the first interpretive prospectus (IP) for Mound City Group in April 1963. The brief IP included three recommendations for future implementation. The first called for an official handbook, and noted one was scheduled to be completed in fiscal year 1965. While this handbook did not materialize, neither did a similar effort performed under contract in the mid-1970s with the Ohio Historical Society. The second IP recommendation dealt with "the main drawback to interpretation at Mound City Group," namely that there was "no place within the visitor center to give an audio-visual lecture or address more than a dozen people who can crowd into the small space by the desk." The alternatives the IP considered included constructing an auditorium addition to seat one hundred visitors in the patio area, or placing a projection cabinet against the rear lobby wall for audio-visual presentations. The IP stressed the auditorium as the "best and most adequate service."

The third recommendation called for a campfire program away from the modern visitor center and earthworks in the forested area along the river. It envisioned evening programs centered around a campfire with vertical logs set in the earth for benches "to suggest the prepared floor surrounded by posts in a circle which lay at the base of each mound and indicated the ceremonials held by the Hopewell people." The IP pointed to the vale near the old picnic shelterhouse as a potential site for the campfire programs. For lack of funds, such a development never came to pass, although evening programs were held in close proximity to the visitor center and without campfires.

The 1963 prospectus concluded with the expressed wish for more research into the daily lives of the Hopewell. Such details would make the interpretive story more interesting and pertinent to visitors. The IP reflected the thinking of regional archeologists in Philadelphia as well as park archeologist Richard D. Faust. The document concluded with the following emphasized statement: "Until Mound City Group is adequately and extensively interpreted by 'livening up' the dramatic aspect of Hopewellian life by showing ON THE GROUND just what is known to have taken place AT THE MOUND SITES, and what was found in them, it will be difficult to keep the area from looking like a pleasant little green park, instead of a great prehistoric ceremonial center." [5]

The need for more information came to pass during the summer of 1963 as the Ohio Historical Society, under contract with the National Park Service, began a multiple-year excavation and mound restoration program. This program failed to address the need to explore non-mortuary aspects of Hopewellian life, and continued the myopic focus on mound exploration that characterized Ohio archeology since the early nineteenth century. Monument interpreters took full advantage of the educational opportunity the archeological work itself presented by erecting temporary displays in the mound area to explain what was happening. Overzealousness, however, also resulted in including a human skeleton unearthed in the southeast corner of the excavations. The remains were left on display as long as possible until the bones were collected and accessioned into the park collection. Temporary displays of photographs in the visitor center also served to whet the appetite of visitors who wished to see previous work of archeologists digging up artifacts and other burial features. June 1963 initiated guided tours conducted by uniformed interpreters through the museum and earthworks in forty-five-minute increments every afternoon [6]

The monument's interpretive leaflet met professional standards of other developed parks for the first time in May 1964. The simple foldover format gave way to a twelve-page, six-fold information folder with sharp illustrations and more descriptive text. A new after-hours distribution box for interpretive folders installed the following month brought a brisk pattern of after-hours use. Operating hours were first expanded during the three peak summer months in June 1964 when the work schedules of one permanent interpreter and two seasonals were staggered to allow expanded operation from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. [7]

During the tenure of General Superintendent William Birdsell, the interpretive program entered a new era. As mound excavation and restoration concluded, the need for a staff archeologist to oversee such contract work gave way to a more immediate need for professional interpretation. In January 1973, the Chillicothe Gazette proudly announced Robert F. Holmes entrance on duty as Mound City Group's first interpretive specialist in the monument's fifty-year history. Holmes began as chief of interpretation and resource management on January 7, 1973, charged with preparation of new programs, panels, and signs, public relations, research, school programs, special tours, and developing an environmental study program. Birdsell announced his pleasure at utilizing the archeological expertise of the Ohio Historical Society, but anticipated Holmes enhancing the interpretive story for visitors in not only the Hopewell culture, but sub-themes like Camp Sherman and the Ohio and Erie Canal as well. [8]

Figure 72: Ranger Jim Anderson presents a guided tour. (NPS/July 1977)

Professionalizing the interpretive program soon paid dividends. In 1976, a "teaching kit" about the Hopewell sent to schools through the mail proved widely popular. The slide program and written narrative also included photographs of artifacts, a replica smoking pipe, and a publication about the Hopewell. So successful was the teaching kit that the Ohio Historical Society duplicated the slide program and made it available to schools throughout the state. Utilizing United States Bicentennial funding for increased interpretive programs, Mound City Group sponsored traveling exhibits, a spring film festival, a play, and three summer concerts. A special exhibit of "Indian Pride on the Move" in July 1976, represented the first non-Washington, D.C., showing of this display of American Indian culture and history. [9]

In addressing the success of a primary management objective to "foster public understanding of Hopewell and Adena cultures," Superintendent Fred Fagergren, Jr., commented on the growing high morale and enthusiasm of his interpreters in 1977. The esprit de corps resulted in better interpretation and glowing visitor comments. Fagergren observed that in previous years, visitor contact from the small interpretive staff was small, but special weekend events and a commitment to expand educational outreach began to yield more than half of all visitors receiving personal attention. He attributed expansion of the trail system, improved signage, and revised museum exhibits as sparking an improved attitude among interpreters. Clearly, Holmes' hard work had begun to yield substantive dividends. [10]

An overnight "Camp In" for youths aged eleven to thirteen came in July 1979, chaperoned by Park Ranger Teresa Nichols and seasonal rangers Beverly Cooper and Steve Race. Limited to twenty children with advanced reservations required, the activity proved immensely popular. The year had special themes of "Year of the Visitor" and "Year of the Child" and programming changed to reflect these special emphases with more than a dozen other special programs lead by rangers. [11]

Interpretive ranger Teresa Nichols conducted sixteen oral history interviews in the spring of 1980 with individuals connected with Camp Sherman. The interviews were designed to be incorporated into a slide-tape program about the World War I army facility to be shown to visitors. Work soon began transcribing the interview sessions, with original recordings maintained at the Harpers Ferry Center. Interpreters also began accumulating quality photographs of the defunct installation. In 1982, seasonal Ruth Bartlett completed the program with technical assistance and narration done by volunteer Joe Murray of WBEX radio, husband of staff member Bonnie Murray. The same year Interpreter Murray wrote the first "Statement for Interpretation" for the monument, a document approved without revision. [12]

Native Americans began receiving special emphasis in 1987 when the park began its first "Native American Indian Day" on September 26. Paralleling Ohio's Native American Recognition Day, Mound City Group provided temporary exhibits and invited Indian volunteers for special talks. In connection with the National Park Service's seventy-fifth anniversary, the park sponsored the "Hopewell Spirit Art Contest," awarding prizes to the best renditions of Hopewell culture. [13]

The first interpretive newsletter debuted in November 1993, designed to keep the public informed about NPS plans and programs for Hopewell Culture National Historical Park. Interpreters assisted in developing a fifteen-minute orientation film called "Legacy of the Mound Builders." Filming took place in June 1993 by Camera I Productions of Seattle, in anticipation of the new auditorium programmed for construction. The park received a first place video award for the film in April 1996 from the Ohio Museum Association. [14]

Utilizing funding from the Mead Corporation, National Park Foundation, and the NPS's Parks as Classrooms program, park interpreters developed and distributed in 1996 more than 150 Hopewell Curriculum Guides to area educators. The 177-page guide proved popular with elementary school teachers and nicely augmented a long-time outreach effort. A record 191 onsite school programs reached nearly five thousand individuals during the 1995-96 school year. The Junior Ranger program, launched earlier in the decade, continued to be popular, with more than 1,400 children earning a patch or badge in 1996. [15] A greatly expanded series of "site bulletins" addressing a wide range of topics in depth was instituted since 1995, improving the quality of public information provided.

As part of the larger environmental movement of the late 1960s and early 1970s, the National Park Service endeavored to be in the vanguard of educating the American people on environmental issues. A partnership effort to spark public interest in environmental education, the Department of the Interior joined with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the National Education Association, and interested local educators to form the National Environmental Study Area (NESA) program. Interest to include Mound City Group National Monument in environmental education began with Superintendent George Schesventer, and culminated with opening an environmental study area (ESA) in May 1973. The Mound City Group ESA, like other such areas, provided an outdoor classroom or laboratory for use by educational institutions in the Chillicothe and Ross County area. To spur academic interest, Interpretive Specialist Robert Holmes hosted an environmental education workshop at the park in October 1973, and invited teachers, resource managers, and environmental specialists to discuss use of the ESA.

While the park provided the ESA opportunity, program development and use rested upon the initiative of local schools and agencies. Few local educators took advantage of it, expressing problems with lack of funding for transportation to access the ESA. Expansion of the nature trail in 1975 to include adjacent fields and woodlands was accomplished in an effort to encourage ESA use. Metalphoto signs were installed the following year that emphasized how native plants were used by American Indians. In the fall of 1975, the park purchased equipment and books in an attempt to revitalize the ESA program. With only two permanent interpreters on staff, calls to local high schools were made seeking interested students to volunteer to assist student groups that might use ESA study facilities. With less than an enthusiastic response, interpreters found that environmental education films were the most popular items requested by area teachers, not physical park resources. [16]

Undaunted by lack of local response, interpreters pressed ahead with plans to include the entire monument as an officially designated NESA, an effort that succeeded in 1978. Combined with special training, the designation committed the monument to lead a more aggressive campaign for an active NESA. To counter local apathy, interpreters in 1977 held a conservation camp at a Chillicothe elementary school, imparting basic environmental concepts to 150 schoolchildren.

Aggressive recruitment of ESA users brought only a few more school groups with environmental education issues on their tour agendas. In 1983, the Ohio University at Chillicothe's ornithology class regularly used the park for field exercises. Ornithologists informed pleased park managers that Mound City Group should be "considered to be one of the outstanding birding areas in the country." [17] When plant specimen collecting threatened to become a problem, Ken Apschnikat issued in the fall of 1987 an open letter to biology and general science teachers concerning collecting leaf or insect specimens for class projects. Informing them that any such collecting was illegal within a National Park Service area, Apschnikat wrote, "If every student assigned such a project removed leaves or insects from the park there would soon be nothing left for future enjoyment by others." Apschnikat requested their assistance in ending the objectionable practice. [18] In the early 1990s, however, park policy changed to grant an exemption to allow collection of plant specimens by students for academic purposes.

On November 4, 1960, Eastern National Park and Monument Association (ENP&MA) officially established a cooperative agency at Mound City Group National Monument. It received an Ohio vendor's license on July 7, 1961, to cover sales of books and souvenirs to visitors. A 1969 inspection by national cooperating association coordinator Edwin C. Alberts revealed "a sharp little association operation" conducted by agent Virginia Skaggs, secretary to the superintendent. Alberts advised remitting sales tax revenue to the state at six-month intervals. Alberts determined there was next to no chance for unfair competition charges being leveled as there were no other park concessioners and the nearest private enterprise was at least four miles away in Chillicothe. He noted, "This region is almost completely free of any tourism-oriented businesses, and no problems appear likely to arise in this field for many years." [19]

In June 1961, a thirty-five-cent, twenty-page illustrated trail pamphlet, "Art and Burials in Ancient Ohio: A Tour of the Mound City Necropolis" went on sale as new trail markers were installed. ENP&MA also developed the first park-related postcards to be sold. In September 1963, a slide show funded by ENP&MA became available for school groups unable to visit the park. Other single slides went on sale at the visitor center in 1964. Working with a Philadelphia manufacturer, a replica of the 1846-excavated human effigy platform pipe went on sale at the ENP&MA outlet and instantly became a popular item. In the fall of 1966, workers constructed the first ENP&MA counter, screen, and sales display rack in the visitor center lobby. [20]

Poor bookkeeping and "incomplete and inaccurate" records prompted the decision in 1972 to contract for the temporary services of a professional bookkeeper as new sales items and increased visitation dramatically boosted annual sales. Particularly popular among visitors were the wide array of replica Hopewell effigy pipes that included the raven, bobcat, squirrel, quail, otter, duck hawk, human head, and wolf. These popular items helped boost sales eighteen percent in 1975. [21]

In 1976, Mound City Group began carrying catlinite pipes and other articles made by the Pipestone Indian Shrine Association at Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota. The monument also requested that Pipestone craftsmen make quality replicas of Hopewell pipes out of Ohio pipestone to replace the poor clay replicas on exhibit. The Minnesota ENP&MA association agreed to make the reproductions without charge. A $4,000 donation brought about construction of a new ENP&MA information and sales desk and two display racks in the visitor center lobby in 1977. [22]

Maturation of the Mound City Group ENP&MA operation came in 1980 when the addition of quality publications and deleting substandard items precipitated a nineteen percent sales increase. For the first time ENP&MA hired its own part-time sale clerk to handle school groups and heavy weekend visitation during the 1980 summer season. The welcome action freed interpretive staff to devote its full energy to educational activities without being tied to the sales desk. ENP&MA donated funds helped purchase a telescope, astronomy materials, a geometric map of Ohio's prehistoric earthworks, and informational brochures of related sites, all of which assisted in improving visitor education programs. ENP&MA funds in 1981 helped publish a museum artifact and exhibit guide, made available during the 1982 season for visitors wanting to know more about specific artifacts. [23]

Ken Apschnikat credited his cooperating association for providing "as much or more financial assistance presently as any local private sector group could" in relating to his Omaha superiors that the park lacked outside private sector involvement. Stressing the park's size, visitation levels, and local economic conditions, he reported "We cannot be optimistic that private sector involvement is a viable alternative for us. As a matter of fact the private sector is looking to us for assistance and help more often than we are looking to them." Citing Ross County's unemployment rate of twelve percent, Apschnikat acknowledged that local businesses and industry were all "fighting hard to avoid bankruptcy." Having the assistance of ENP&MA, therefore, proved to be a real blessing for Mound City Group. [24]

While hiring a sales clerk for the busy 1980 season was beneficial, receiving the same luxury for subsequent seasons became nearly essential as sales and visitation increased. Citing budget and staff cutbacks in 1985, Apschnikat requested the association hire a sales agent to work no more than eight hours per week over a six-week period. He admitted finding it "increasingly difficult to handle the Eastern National operation and the rest of our interpretive activities." [25]

Sales continued to climb during the 1980s despite the national economic recession. Loss of popular out-of-print books concerning the Hopewell, particularly Martha Otto's "Ohio's Prehistoric Peoples," hindered interpretive efforts and kept sales from climbing further. Apschnikat observed in 1985 that "Our greatest need continues to be the lack of affordable sales items that deal with our primary theme. Efforts are being made to find publishers to reprint two publications that deal directly with the Hopewell Indians." With paper donated by The Mead Paper Company of Chillicothe, ENP&MA updated the 1975 brochure called "National Park Service Areas in Ohio," adding two affiliated areas, James A. Garfield National Historic Site in Mentor, and David Berger National Memorial in Cleveland, Ohio. [26]

Despite a nine percent drop in visitation, ENP&MA sales increased almost twenty percent in 1990, and forty percent in 1991. In the latter year, the display area expanded as the once crowded visitor center saw most of its administrative operations relocate to the former residence building. ENP&MA added a third display rack using donated funds. [27]

ENP&MA experienced its best year in Chillicothe in 1995 when its sales increased seventy-five percent in fiscal year 1995 over 1994 ($64,500 from $36,200). Impacted by construction activity in 1994, the visitor center remodeling yielded expanded sales areas and a fifty percent increase in sales items with a stock total of 230. The economic boom netted Hopewell Culture National Historical Park more than $4,700 in donated funds allocated for three audio stations and new printed materials for the self-guided trail, educational brochures for interpretive programs, closed-captioned service for the video program, new interpretive signage within the visitor center, and new book shelves. The cooperative association paid for more than four hundred hours to employ a sales clerk. [28]

In 1997, the organization simplified its name. The corporate national cooperative association is now called Eastern National.

National Park Service Director Conrad L. Wirth approved the MISSION 66 Prospectus for Mound City Group National Monument on June 3, 1957, with the added provision for "restoration of ground cover to approach that of the historic period of the mounds." [29] Indeed, the goal to convert the grassy, heavily mowed landscape to more natural, aboriginal conditions had been a National Park Service goal for the national monument since the agency assumed management responsibility in 1946. It became a practical necessity from a management standpoint considering the manhours and equipment needed for mowing operations. With the lack of funds to achieve reforestation, Clyde King began planting seeds and transplanting young trees himself. Interpreters trying to relate the Mound City Group landscape to the time of Hopewell use, however, had the greatest difficulty convincing visitors to see beyond the green, evenly-cut turf, which clearly reflected the ideals of twentieth-century America, to a dim forested reality of centuries past. Turf management practices designed for golf course beauty had to be abandoned at Mound City Group. The goal became embedded in planning documents ranging from the 1965 master plan to interpretive prospectus to the archeological research management plan.

Landscaping around the 1960 visitor center was itself designed to place the new building in a forested setting to reflect what the larger restored scene would one day appear like. Yews were to be maintained as a "loose informal hedge-like trim to the building" and never pruned evenly with hedge shears. Other foundation plantings were to be kept in a similar, natural form. Certifying the completion of the project, Clyde King wrote, it "completes the first step toward the ultimate goal of restoring the area to woodland setting with the Mounds appearing within a partially cleared space surrounded by woods." King continued, "Steps should be taken immediately to bring reforestation of the area through the natural process of regeneration and as funds become available this process can be supplemented by the addition of certain basic forest hardwood seedlings of the proper associated species. Accordingly, it is recommended that all mowing operations cease in those areas proposed for future woodland, and since the park is located on highly fertile river basin land, it is anticipated that this reforestation will proceed with surprising speed." [30]

Figure 73: The golf-course turf management practices at Mound City Group sparked interpreters and park managers to contemplate the prehistoric Hopewellian landscape. (NPS/1974)

Figure 74: Aerial view of Mound City Group looking southeast, with reforestation having a noticeable impact on the landscape. (NPS/Brian Jones, Harpers Ferry Center, November 1978)

In anticipation of reforestation, the 1961 growing season saw a substantial curtailment or elimination of mowing in specific areas. Before the forest could appear, however, managers agreed that the park's boundary had to be fenced. Initial plans for a hurricane fence were changed in 1961 to provide for a low, post-cable type fence primarily to prevent automobiles from leaving the highway and creating informal roads through the park. Once reforestation occurred, however, the fencing could be removed. In late 1962, plans changed again to have the fencing be a post-rail type. Foresters recommended that 1,600 trees cover a forty-acre area. Accelerated Public Works Program workers began the planting and fencing task in April 1963. Severe drought conditions took a tremendous toll on the 1,600 seedlings, while ten percent of 168 transplanted older trees perished. [31]

Estimates for achieving reforestation were revised in 1970. Exhausting available funds, Mound City Group purchased one thousand seedlings in February 1970 from the Division of Forestry and Reclamation, Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Seedlings numbered 250-each of green ash, red gum, white oak, and tuliptree. To continue the program, five thousand more seedlings were required. The effort came in a piecemeal fashion. In 1975, as part of a scouting project, a local troop planted one thousand hardwood seedlings on an acre of former lawn north of the entrance. Maple whip stock from other forested areas were also introduced in this area. [32]

This emphasis on reforestation was pursued without any scientific consideration of what the scene might have been two thousand years ago. Scholarship at the end of the twentieth century empasized natural prairie openings to a drastically modified environment, one of deforestation because of aboriginal agricultural practices. The emphasis reflected a pervasive Euro-American myth that America was wilderness prior to white colonization.

Figure 75: Interpreters looked to Squier and Davis descriptions of trees and river gravel atop portions of the Mound City Group earthworks. A tree grows from a mound in the northeast corner. (NPS/circa 1975)

More tree-planting took place in 1976 in areas east and west of the entrance road. More mature trees were taken from heavily wooded areas, and for the first time, archeologists monitored the ground disturbance for potential subsurface resources. The same year saw an operations evaluation team recommend a land use plan to realize once and for all the recreation of a "prehistoric scene." The idea originated by similar mounds maintenance issues at Effigy Mounds National Monument, Iowa, and the recognition that Mound City Group required similar technical assistance from regional landscape architects. Preliminary recommendations from Omaha essentially concurred that planting plans sanctioned in 1960 with the visitor center landscape and in the 1965 master plan be implemented. The monument invited public comment for comprehensive reforestation, which also included removing steps from Mound 7, the Death Mask Mound, obliterate all signs of former railroad grades, transferring the picnic area to a wooded area adjacent to the visitor center, and expand the trail system. [33]

Interpreters envisioned more than just trees surrounding the Mound City Group earthworks enclosure to make the landscape more realistic. To reflect the conditions known to exist in 1846, one key goal of the interpretive prospectus called for covering "certain mounds with pebbles as when originally constructed by Hopewells." Superintendent Fred Fagergren, Jr., enthusiastically made this interpretive goal into his own management objective in 1976, only to be met with a Midwest Archeological Center request to delay implementation pending further research. Acknowledging the maintenance dilemma inherent to his idea, Fagergren proposed restoring the pebble and gravel coverings, from eight to twenty inches thick, to eight mounds as described by Squier and Davis in Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley. Fagergren argued that "Restoration of the mounds to a gravel and pebble surface will more accurately reflect the realities these people faced in construction of these monuments to their dead. While the present turf-covered mounds might be easier to maintain, they are not accurate reconstructions nor can they be interpreted as such." [34]

Fagergren's goal of restoring Mound City Group to historic 1846 conditions remained unfulfilled during his superintendency. It remained stalled because of a servicewide policy concerning reconstructions that mandated any physical changes to recapture elements from a previous era had to be based on a minimum of conjecture. Agency policy had matured since the 1960s when reconstruction efforts, including that at Mound City Group itself, could progress without intensive scrutiny by cultural specialists. Oftentimes the result of these ill-advised efforts produced scenes that strayed far from historical reality or authenticity. Under evolving historic preservation policies of the 1970s, radical changes to cultural resources such as reconstructions had to be based on substantial research and ultimately approved by the agency's director. In the absence of any concerted research into the actual characteristics of Mound City Group's Hopewellian appearance, management policy as determined by Washington, D.C., and implemented by regional Omaha agency officials required the status quo continue indefinitely.

Making the best of the situation, Fagergren issued a July 1980 policy directive instructing employees to help maintain the integrity of the historic scene in their everyday activities. In the "Historic Area" of the mounds enclosure, modern intrusions were to be kept to a minimum during primary visitation periods. Fagergren declared:

A substantial reduction in acreage being mowed has occurred compared to previous years, but not necessarily the smallest reduction possible. Policy calls for grass on the earthworks proper. The acreage within the wall is mowed in absence of research/data on the actual scene. Vistas are maintained for the Visitor Center from the highway and from the Visitor Center to earthworks. The extent of mowing mandates an intrusion by equipment. Mowing is not scheduled on weekends to remove the intrusion at least during that peak period. Research on the historic scene must occur; this data will affect and lessen the mowing practices....

Fagergren determined that other recreational uses could and should take place in these green, open vistas. He continued, stating:

The vista areas are the focal points for the other 'non-conforming recreational use.' Generally the earthworks do not experience this use. The large vistas are naturally inviting to an occasional frisbee, baseball or volleyball player. We strive to conform with policy by asking visitors to restrict these activities to the vista area west of the Visitor Center, and therefore out of the historic scene. The picnic area is also out of sight in the trees and does not intrude on the scene.

In conclusion, he informed his staff, we "can do little to more closely conform with policy until research has occurred and data are available on the historic scene." [35]

Programming for necessary research funds came about simultaneously with the new resource management plan in 1982. The proposed "prehistoric vegetation study" would include an archeological pollen study, analysis of faunal remains, charcoal analysis, and evaluation of soil samples taken from undisturbed areas. Observing that contemporary grass cover and forest succession conditions might or might not resemble the prehistoric period of Hopewell occupation, roughly 200 B.C. to 500 A.D., Ken Apschnikat stated, "All suppositions as to what vegetative conditions might have existed are scientifically unsupported hypotheses." [36]

Three different hypotheses circulated in the mid-1980s concerning the prehistoric landscape. The first held that before the Hopewell occupation and construction of Mound City Group, a prairie or savanna naturally maintained by fire existed with a narrow band of floodplain forest along the Scioto River. Following Indian occupation and the lack of fire episodes, hardwood forest took over. The second hypothesis determined that hardwood forest existed during the moundbuilding era and the Hopewell removed and kept trees from growing within the mound earthwall enclosure itself. The final hypothesis differed from the second only in that the Hopewell removed trees merely to construct charnel houses, mounds, walls, borrow pits, and potential vista areas. Otherwise, the forest prevailed. [37]

But even Apschnikat showed impatience at waiting for funding and initiated a new experiment by authorizing an expanded area in the northeast corner of the mounds be allowed to revegetate naturally during the 1986 growing season by removing it from regular mowing. He did so in order to demonstrate "the appearance... during Squier and Davis' time." [38]

Initial funding materialized in 1987 when a resource management specialist from Michigan's Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Dr. Walter Loope, began a literature search and interviews with archeologists to outline prehistoric vegetation compositions at both Mound City Group and Hopeton Earthworks. Resource managers recognized that based upon study results, contemporary maintenance practices could be reversed or lack of credible data could leave them with the status quo. In any case, Apschnikat believed his experiment in permitting tallgrass to exist next to manicured lawn simply gave visitors "another possible historic landscape for the mound area." [39]

Nineteen-eighty-nine represented a watershed year concerning traditional turf management practices at Mound City Group. The previous growing season had featured a lingering drought that browned and weakened an already stressed turf. Conditions were further exacerbated by construction activity for the new prison across State Highway 104 when the former agricultural fields began being infested with noxious weeds, seeds of which blew with prevailing winds onto monument lands. The result brought an aggressive invasion of unsightly weeds that threatened to overtake mowed areas unless prevented by chemicals and other expensive, labor-intensive actions. With this bleak scenario, a change in top park management came in late 1988.

Superintendent William Gibson took three months to assess the situation before making his bold announcement for a radical change of course. In a March 1989 memorandum to his subordinate division chiefs, Gibson shared his impression of the park's earthworks landscape management practices and shared with them knowledge gained from a cultural landscape management seminar sponsored by the Southeast Regional Office in Atlanta, Georgia. Gibson's attitudes were particularly influenced by an earthworks management manual developed in the Mid-Atlantic Region for Civil War-era landscapes. He suggested its approach be adopted as a model and operating guide. Because of funding limitations, the incorporation of an expanded Hopeton Earthworks, as well as proposals to add other Hopewell sites for NPS management, the time proved propitious for altering management practices at Mound City Group.

Recognizing that study results were still pending, Bill Gibson rejected outright the mowed appearance of the mounds. Gibson asserted:

...this golf course appearance in no way represents the appearance created by the Hopewell moundbuilders. With the most probable landscaping of the mound builders era being dense river bottom woodland, interspaced with human created slash and burn open spaces and/or naturally occurring patches of prairie grassland, neither scene is represented by our modern day turf lawn maintenance. More probable would be vast expanses of uncut forest interspaced with small, patchy woodland openings, created by arduous cutting with stone tools, and maintained using fire to burn debris. Such openings, containing stumps and downed timber, would quickly be overgrown by invading growth of weeds, vines and woody sprouts. With no domesticated grazing animals available, and no mechanical means other than the wear of daily foot traffic to keep down the brush, fire remains as the most likely management tool available to the moundbuilders. [40]

He concluded by ascertaining "the predictable result of such slash and burn land clearing, as well as that of naturally occurring patches of prairie grassland, is native tall grass ground cover." Gibson recommended the park's immediate resource management priority was to convert more turf to tall-grass native species and reduce the maintenance burden. [41]

Anticipating public inquiries or complaints as the grass continued to grow in early June 1989, Gibson prepared a briefing statement to help educate the public on the "Native Tall Grass Restoration" effort underway. Explaining the rationale behind the landscape changes, the statement acknowledged that turf maintenance efforts would only occur in core interpretive areas and walkways while the remaining open grounds would be encouraged to revert to native tall grass. Maintenance by controlled burning might be considered to either replace or complement periodic mowing. Change in habitat would also bring biological change and more diversity as native grass, wildflowers, and other native plants submerged bluegrass and common weeds. Thirteen-lined ground squirrels, discouraged by the tall grass, would go elsewhere, but groundhogs could increase. Field nesting birds like the bobolink would appear but so would hawk predators. Ticks and chiggers might discourage visitors from leaving mowed areas to explore the tall grass with the beneficial aspect of reduced foot traffic erosion, earthworks destruction, and enhanced archeological protection. Natural restoration would continue for two growing seasons, with the first cutting in the fall of 1990 accomplished with a tractor on flat areas and hand-carried brush cutters on the raised earthworks. [42]

Figure 76: This aerial view plainly shows divergent turf managment practices within the Mound City Group, from mowed to tallgrass areas. (NPS/July 3, 1994)

The native bluestem restoration area encompassed approximately nine acres of previously maintained lawn area in the Mound City Group earthworks. Thanks to the efforts of a vigilant interpretive staff, visitor reaction to the radical change proved "favorable and supportive." An interpretive handout designed to educate the public concerning the project also helped prevent any adverse public reaction. Interpreters reported the new appearance helped ease the task of recapturing a pre-twentieth century era as well as incorporating coverage of native plants and wildlife into their daily visitor contacts. [43]

With acquisition of Hopeton Earthworks in 1990, the tall grass restoration project shifted across the Scioto River. Previously cultivated areas were seeded with a mixture of switchgrass, Indian grass, and little bluestem, providing a quick, low maintenance cover to arrest erosion while at the same time rendering an "aesthetically pleasing" look. Problems at both areas in 1991 centered on an infestation of Canada thistle. With manual removal proving ineffective, managers selected periodic mowing as a means to check the pesky exotic. [44]

A contract to provide the long-promised prehistoric vegetation study, while let in 1988, did not yield a final product until the spring of 1991. Preliminary data, however, became known as early as 1989 and served to validate the management actions taken by Bill Gibson. In July 1988, Dr. Ronald O. Kapp of Alma College, and Gordon G. Snyder of Schoolcraft College, both in Michigan, took a series of sedimentary core samples from area ponds. From these murky depths, the researchers discovered undisturbed sediment from which pollen analysis could determine area vegetation patterns over the course of centuries. Their final report determined that "the extent of open, non-forest vegetation was considerably greater prior to ca. 2000 B.C. than after." During the early stages of the Hopewell culture, the area experienced a "transition from a more open to a more forested environment." [45]

The report seemed to contradict efforts to restore an open, prairie-like environment. For the first time, park managers had scientific data to make landscape management decisions. The data put into question the tall grass restoration launched by Bill Gibson in 1989. Working behind the scenes to formulate long-term management strategies were H. Reed Johnson, chief of interpretation and resource management, and Steve Cinnamon, resource management specialist in Omaha. [46]

Ironically, the goal of recreating a Hopewellian cultural landscape predated the birth of an aggressive cultural landscape program in established in the Midwest Region. With the arrival in Omaha of Regional Historical Landscape Architect Mary V. Hughes in January 1991, the changed cultural landscape at Mound City Group, the subject of heated debate for decades, was already taking firm root in the Chillicothe soil. With the ascendancy of historical landscapes within cultural resources management, the 1997 general management plan calls for a cultural landscape report to guide development within all five units of Hopewell Culture National Historical Park.