larger department so share common regulations or policies; look to others for particular kinds of assistance, expertise, or knowledge; and have a common interest in protecting historic properties and telling their stories. In their responses, many agencies spent considerable time describing their partnerships, how they assist the agency, and their accomplishments. They are rightly proud of their ability to bring their history to the wider public, and it shows in their reporting. However, some agencies responded that they do not have or pursue preservation partnerships due to security requirements or other impediments. The value of partnerships is clear, and the following recommendations on steps agencies can take to develop, expand, and better use partnerships to achieve the goals of this EO are provided below. Recommendations: ›› Agencies that do not employ partnerships should identify and work to remove any factors that might limit their ability to enter into partnerships to assist them in addressing historic preservation goals and requirements. ›› The ACHP should work with the NPS and the Administration to expand and foster the Preserve America Stewards Program and other agencies to identify volunteer programs which include work on the protection of historic properties. FINDING: Agencies would benefit from more effective mechanisms to ensure timely involvement of Indian tribes and NHOs in property management activities and infrastructure planning. The challenges regarding tribal involvement in infrastructure projects were the focus of an unprecedented interagency tribal consultation effort in late 2016; the subject of a roundtable discussion at the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in September 2017; and, the longstanding work of the ACHP. There remains a strong interest in seeing improvements among all involved, notably tribal leaders, federal officials, and industry representatives. One outcome of the interagency consultation was a report issued by the ACHP, Improving Tribal Consultation and Tribal Coordination in Federal Infrastructure Decisions (May 2017) [http://www.achp.gov/docs/achp-infrastructure-report.pdf ] which provided a number of recommendations on improving tribal consultation for infrastructure projects. These recommendations included, among other things, that federal agencies involved in infrastructure projects should develop guidance and procedures to improve coordination between applicants and Indian tribes prior to the selection of preferred alternatives, plan for consultation with Indian tribes on a landscape and programmatic level, and develop procedures for ensuring that consultation begins as early as possible. In addition to the recommendations within this report, there are a number of other steps the ACHP and federal agencies that manage property can take to improve consultation with Indian tribes and NHOs regarding impacts to historic properties on federal lands and properties.
58 | IN A SPIRIT OF STEWARDSHIP: A REPORT ON FEDERAL HISTORIC PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 2018
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker