hnalogo.jpg (103481 bytes)

 

Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society

Home
Up
Geology
Soils
Water
Agricultural Lands
Forest Lands
Historical Context
Settlement Settings
Federal Land Transfers: 1850s-1930s
Railroad: 1883-2007
Emigrant PVC: 1880s-2007
Hugo Granite Tombstone Quarry Site: 1880s-1929
Highways: 1913 - 2007
Applegate Trail Integrity
Land Use
Research and Field Work

 

APPLEGATE TRAIL INTEGRITY

ASSESSMENT Of PROPOSED PIONEER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION
CONTAINING APPLEGATE TRAIL RESOURCES

IV.F.8. Applegate Trail Integrity1&2

a) Introduction

The approximate 1.5 miles of the Hugo Tombstone Quarry Section of the Applegate Trail is from the East I-5 Manzanita Rest Stop in the south to the 1880s emigrant Pleasant Valley Cemetery in the north (Map 18; Map 19; Map 21). It includes two of Hugo’s Applegate Trail segments: JASec 2 and Applegate Trail JASec 3 (see Sections IV.F.1-6). This trail segment includes the Hugo Granite Tombstone Quarry Site and hence the name for this segment of the Applegate Trail. It is also located on the land of the Proposed Pioneer Meadows Subdivision, on both sides of I-5 and under I-5.

Integrity is the ability of a historic property to convey its significance. To be listed in the National Register of Historic Places, a property must not only be shown to be significant under one of the four National Register criteria, but it also must have integrity. The evaluation of integrity is sometimes a subjective judgment, but it must always be grounded in an understanding of a property's physical features and how they relate to its significance. Historic properties either retain integrity (that is, convey their significance) or they do not. Within the concept of integrity, the National Register criteria recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity.1-2

To retain historic integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects. The retention of specific aspects of integrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance. Determining which of these aspects are most important to a particular property requires knowing why, where, and when the property is significant. The following sections define the seven aspects and explain how they combine to produce integrity.

Abandoned linear features that have a high potential of adding to our knowledge of past land use practices (e.g., Chinese mining ditches, early wagon roads) will be recorded as historic archaeological sites and given Smithsonian trinomial numbers.

. Location
. Design
. Setting
. Materials
. Workmanship
. Feeling
. Association

There are five basic types of historic resources: buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts.

The most common historic structures are bridges and linear features, such as canals, railroad grades, trails, and roads. Linear structures are a challenging type of resource both to document and preserve. There are still no detailed guidelines at the national level for documenting and evaluating resources that stretch for miles, include a minimum of distinguishable historic features, and are under almost constant repair, resurfacing, or upgrading.4

Historic sites can be further defined into two distinct site types: archaeological and non-archaeological. In most cases, linear features (regardless of condition) such as roads, railroads, ditches and canals, will be recorded as historic non-archaeological sites and not as historic archaeological sites. However, abandoned linear features that have a high potential of adding to our knowledge of past land use practices (e.g., Chinese mining ditches, early wagon roads) will be recorded as historic archaeological sites and given Smithsonian trinomial numbers (Appendix C1).

Many kinds of historic period archaeological sites can be understood through historic maps, photos, drawings, written records, and, sometimes, oral histories.3

Site quality or resolution refers to how observable or recognizable the site condition is using contemporary archaeological field methods.3 Assessment of site condition and quality is based upon a careful analysis of the potential impacts of a host of processes affecting natural and cultural materials. As these materials cease to be a part of a living human ecosystem they become incorporated into an archaeological context.

Archaeology is ultimately about site discovery; hence, the expression "seek and ye shall find" applies strongly to the discipline. However, regulatory archaeology requires a greater degree of focus in this quest to ensure that public and private funds are spent with the reasonable chance of discovering and researching sites that are important to the state and individual communities.3 Accordingly, the quality of the evidence about a site’s existence in a particular location is an important consideration for the Oregon SHPO in determining whether or not to proceed with assessing an archaeological site. According to the Oregon SHPO some examples of strong evidence for the existence of a archaeological site(s) in a given location include:

• A recorded site.
• Specific documentary reference to a site in that location from historic research.
• Specific reference to a site in that location from knowledgeable local individuals.
• Visible ruins and features on the ground surface.
• Geographic or historic context that suggest the existence of a site or particular category of           site.
• The standing structure itself is listed on or eligible for the National Register and is    
        associated with a priority research topic; it may have archaeological components that
        contribute important archaeological information.

b) Applegate Trail Integrity

The following is a preliminary assessment of the Applegate Trail’s integrity as compared to the National Register’s seven aspects of integrity.

(1) Location

The integrity of location means the site, or linear feature of the trail, has not moved. The actual location of the Applegate Trail is intact. However, much of it is buried beneath the climate of western Oregon and the population pressures of development (see Section IV.G.).

(2) Design

This Applegate Trail evolved through time with the expansion of new transportation systems (see Section IV.F.7.f)). The climate of western Oregon and development forces continue to degrade the design of the trail. The design in the setting of the lowland Proposed Pioneer Meadows Subdivision has the greatest potential for research as it has been the least touched by development (see Section IV.G.).

(3) Setting

There are many modern day intrusions that have compromised the setting. However, its location is captured in several maps, surveys, the local topography, some ruts, fenced corridors, and cairns (see Section IV.F.6.). The eastern part, Applegate Trail JASec 2, is in public ownership and generally protected against additional development. Except for the Pleasant Valley Cemetery, the western part of the Applegate Trail, section JASec 3, is in private ownership and generally unprotected against additional development.

(4) Materials

The Applegate Trail is not in its original state. It is the evolution of the trial into abandonment and mystery. Materials of the trail’s construction were dirt and perhaps decomposed granite.

(5) Workmanship

The Applegate Trail has retained its original location, but its workmanship was crude and has changed substantially.

(6) Feeling

Elements of the Applegate Trail evoke a strong sense of feeling when viewed and understood by visitors (i.e., visitor is educated concerning specific documentary reference to a site in that location from historic research; specific reference to a site in that location from knowledgeable local individuals; visible features on the ground surface; and geographic or historic context that suggest the existence of a site. The following are examples of sites and features along this segment of the Applegate Trail (see Section IV.F.6.).

1. Mary Harris cairns and swale, Harris Creek, historical stories
2. Intensive GLO data within one mile (seven surveyed locations, two houses Davis and Harris, 5 trail locations, including JA-6 in the draw).
3. Davis Military Warrent and Harris Donation Land Claim.
4. Visible trail at Pioneer Meadow Subdivision Application Area
5. Use of Applegate Trail by Hugo Granite Tombstone Quarry Site operators to move memorials.
6. Shepard, Wright, And Lowrey properties, especially JA-8 at Lowrey
7. Emigrant Pleasant Valley Cemetery

(7) Association

National Register of Historic Places Criterion D:
"D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history."

The feeling of a historic Applegate Trail is powerful because of its historic context and national significance. There is a strong sense of connectedness between the Applegate Trail and a visitor’s ability to discern the historical activity which occurred at the site through an understanding of its historical context (see Sections IV.F.1-6).

. Applegate Trail: 1846 - 1913
. Homestead Era: 1862 - 1937
. Railroad: 1883 - 2007
. Emigrant Pleasant Valley Cemetery (PVC): 1870s - 2007
. Hugo Granite Tombstone Quarry Site: 1880s - 1929
. Highways: 1913 - 2007

c) National Register of Historic Places Criterion D

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association related to several criteria for evaluation and criteria considerations. There are four National Register of Historic Places evaluation criteria (see Section III).1 Criterion D follows:

"D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history."

Properties eligible under National Register of Historic Places’ Criteria A, B, and C must not only retain their essential physical features, but the features must be visible enough to convey their significance. This means that even if a property is physically intact, its integrity is questionable if its significance features are concealed under modern construction. Archeological properties are often the exception to this; by their nature they usually do not require visible features to convey their significance.1

Stated another way: For properties eligible under the National Register of Historic Places Criterion D, including archeological sites and standing structures studies for their information potential, less attention is given to their overall condition, than if they were being considered under Criteria A, B, or C. Archeological sites, in particular, do not exist today exactly as they were formed. There are always cultural and natural processes that alter the deposited materials and their spatial relationships.1 For properties eligible under Criterion D, integrity is based upon the property’s potential to yield specific data that addresses important research questions, such as those identified in the historic context documentation in the Statewide Comprehensive Preservation Plan.1&4

The 2005 Oregon Historic Preservation Plan (Appendix I4)documents that:

• "Conversely, the location and details about historic resources are usually promoted as expression of community or neighborhood pride, and often as part of heritage tourism and economic development efforts."
• "Given that excavation is essentially a destructive process, the preferred treatment for archaeological resources is to simply leave them alone."
• "Archaeological resources, on the other hand, do not lend themselves to adaptive use and rehabilitation treatments. The most aggressive treatment for archaeological sites is usually stabilization and on-site interpretation, and then only for a very small number of sites that lend themselves to public visitation."
The Oregon Handbook For Historic Preservation Planning5 documents that:
• "State law (ORS 358.653) mandates that state agencies and political subdivisions (counties, cities, school districts, park districts, fire districts, service districts, etc.) develop programs to preserve significant historic properties which they own or for which they are responsible."
• Appendix A identifies themes potentially applicable to the Applegate Trail:
. Broad Theme: Archaeology - Oregon Theme: Historic Archaeology.
. Broad Theme: Settlement - Oregon Theme: Immigration & Regional Settlement.
. Broad Theme: Transportation & communication - Oregon Theme: Land Communication.

• Appendix C identifies resource types potentially applicable to the Applegate Trail:

. Highway.
. Homestead and by extension Military Patent and/or Donation Land Claim home place.
. Natural feature/spring, and by extension a recognized wetland.
. Orchard.
. Oregon Trail, and, therefore, by extension the Applegate Trail as the Oregon Legislature recognizes the value and significance of its historic trails, including the historic Applegate Trail (ORS 358.057. Value and Significance of State Historic Trails).

ORS 358.057(3) "(3) The Applegate National Historic Trail"

. Residence/farmhouse.
. Road.
. Road Related.
. Site/Archaeological.
. Trail.

d) Integrity Conclusions

Although difficult to see, the actual location of the Applegate Trail is intact.

The Applegate Trail’s integrity as compared to the National Register’s seven aspects of integrity is not strong when compared to the National Register of Historic Places Criteria A, B, or C.

However, it is strong when compared with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office’s Guidelines For Conducting Field Archaeology in Oregon3 and the guide’s examples of strong evidence for the existence of a archaeological site(s) in a given location.

The integrity of the Applegate Trail is reasonable in the sense that archeological sites do not exist today exactly as they were formed. There are always cultural and natural processes that alter the deposited materials and their spatial relationships. The Applegate Trail’s integrity is strong when judged by the standard of the National Register of Historic Places Criterion D which is based upon the property’s potential to yield specific data that addresses important research questions, such as those identified in the historic context documentation of the Statewide Comprehensive Preservation Plan.

In summary, the Applegate Trail’s integrity as compared to the National Register’s seven aspects of integrity is good and satisfies the National Register’s standards.

9. Impact Agents

. Population Growth
. Residential Developments

1. USDI, National Park Service. Revised for Internet 1995. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulletin. National Register of Historic Places. U.S. Government Printing Office: 2005–717-788. Washington, DC.
2. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Part VIII. How To Evaluate The Integrity Of A Property
3. Oregon State Historic Preservation Office. 2006. Guidelines For Conducting Field Archaeology in Oregon. Working draft. Salem, OR.
4. Oregon State Historic Preservation Office. 2005. 2005 Oregon Historic Preservation Plan. Salem, OR.
5. Oregon State Historic Preservation Office. 1997. Handbook For Historic Preservation Planning. Salem, OR.

Back to Top  

2012 Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society