Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 14 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Company has no plans to build near mound
Published Sunday, March 16, 2008
NATCHEZ — A piece of historical treasure lies on the grounds of the property Rentech plans to buy.
An Indian mound that has yet to be archaeologically investigated is along the perimeter of the property.
Tom Sayles, vice president of corporate communications and government affairs for Rentech, said the company is not planning on building in the area of the mound.
“We believe we can segregate this from our main operation,” Sayles said.
The mound is called a Linwood mound, said Jim Barnett, director of historical properties division for the Mississippi Department of Archives and History at the Grand Village on the Natchez Indians.
It was recognized as a mound by a team of Harvard archaeologists in 1962, said David Abbott, archaeologist for MDAH. Other than that, not much is known about the mound.
There are several types of Indian mounds, two of which are burial and ceremonial.
“About 2,000 years ago, the main type of mound being built in this area were burial mounds,” Barnett said. “There were round topped piles of earth built to cover human graves.”
But when the Natchez Indian culture came about around 700 A.D., mounds had changed to flat-topped triangles used for ceremonial purposes.
Due to erosion and possible damage from when a railroad spur was built too close, it would take more than just looking at the mound to determine what type it is.
Indian mounds are common area and can date back to 6,000 years ago.
Although this particular mound is not in harm’s way, Sayles said Rentech plans to donate it to the appropriate historical or archaeological society.
Barnett said Grand Village would be happy to talk to Rentech about the donation of the land. They just want to see it preserved.
“The best way to preserve an Indian mound is not to allow it to be bulldozed down or otherwise removed,” Barnett said. “Most of the danger to an Indian mound would come from the removal of the mounds to allow some sort of development to take place.”
Barnett is sure that this is not the case with Rentech.
If it were donated to MDAH, Rentech could receive tax breaks, Abbott said.
The state would not necessarily mark the property as historical, as in this case, Abbott said there is really no way to view the mound as an attraction.
Archaeological Conservancy, a nonprofit organization with a mission to preserve historical sites, has shown interest in possibly acquiring the mound.
“We’ll make some inquires, said George Lowry, delta field representative for the conservancy.
Even if Rentech decides they don’t want to donate the mound, the conservancy would look into purchasing it.
Archaeological Conservancy would first view the mound. If everything looked fine, they would get a survey of the mound, then an appraisal.
Then they basically become owners of the property.
Any studies of the mound by either museums or universities would have to be approved by the conservancy.
The conservancy would choose not to mark the property as historical, to keep from attracting vandals.
“We would be stewards of the property,” Lowry said.
Comments
Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on March 16, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I hope whomever draws up this sale contract with Rentech writes a provision to it that if Rentech fails to develop this site and create jobs the land reverts back to the county. Otherwise we are likely to be giving it away and if another company is interested in the land Rentec will sell it at a profit.
Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on March 16, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How long did IP have this land? Now the mound is a BIG deal...Why didn't IP doante the land?
Posted by grrbrts (anonymous) on March 16, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There are three types of Property Rights; timber, surface, and mineral. This Site would fall under surface rights, for one. My first question would be, "Is this mound considered a marked or an unmarked burial mound/grave site?" If this mound is in fact one of the latter two, how has or will, waste/pollutants affect it's contents?
Posted by redusmfan (anonymous) on March 16, 2008 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sounds to me like the don't really have any plans to build anything yet.
The other article says that they have not lined up investors yet, they are waiting till they get all the land deeds in their hands..So,
I guess they really do not have any plans to build near the mound....
Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on March 17, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If we are talking about the IP site, a Natchez Indian village was located there, and an entire property survey should be done -- NOT JUST THE MOUND. Generally mounds were associated with sites that stretched much farther than the mounds. Natchez graves occur wherever folks wanted them to, and many graves are widely scattered.
But that didn't stop IP development, did it? This is a second chance.
It is good to reserve the mound, and not to dig it in any way. In a few years or a hundred we might be able to learn much, much more about what was there.
We should support the Archaeological Conservancy efforts to acquire the site, or an outright donation to MDAH, but before that there should be a survey of the entire site.
So much information is lost in the name of progress, making money and the bulldozer, that doing a really good job on this opportunity would not hurt anything. Folks who would not preserve this heritage decide for all future generations that knowing history is just something to squander for a few bucks today.
Posted by grrbrts (anonymous) on March 17, 2008 at 12:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Great point Yeahuhuh! There must be an entire property survey. And, the use of a GPR device should be a part of that assessment.
Posted by Dd (anonymous) on March 17, 2008 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is sacred ground and should stay that way......I hope this company keeps its promise....Why has this not made headlines or been researched since 1962?!?!
Maybe because it has nothing to do with pilgrimage ...Let's spend all of our money on houses/landscaping that will eventually crumble..that will save our town!
How would you feel if a company wanted to build a structure very close to( if not on) a cemetary?
Just because it does not have monuments or flowers does not make it less important.
Natchez has a lot of historical value..it's like no other place I have been to or lived...to be able to stand in the very spot that at one time was the biggest port in the US(where a casino is now) is amazing to me..that port brought many people from different backgrounds to Natchez..I think that we tend to forget that sometimes..What is important to you..may not be at the top of my list and so on.
History is history and you cannot be prejudice about that.
Native Americans were treated very poorly(do some research before you start telling me otherwise)
They did a lot for this nation and it hardly makes the news,yet you can find a marker where a confederate soldier took a nap...It's sickening to me because these are my people.
Lets preserve our history,so that we may learn from it.
Posted by redusmfan (anonymous) on March 17, 2008 at 6:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Will the mound employee 200 people if it is left alone and the grounds around it are not disturbed?...If so, then leave all teh ground undisturbed..if not, employee the people that are living TODAY PLEASE......ENOUGH OF GOOD GROUND IN NATCHEZ IS ALREADY BEING PRESERVED FOREVER....LETS NOT ADD TO IT FOR ANY REASON.....
Posted by Dd (anonymous) on March 17, 2008 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow!
Your ignorance does not suprise me....JUST 200 jobs?I don't care if it's 2,000!
I have an idea...if you want a job ..spend less time posting trash here and go find one..don't give me that crap about there are no jobs.......there are no jobs you want...people do things everyday they don't want to do,and some do not get paid for it!
"Good ground" in Natchez is preserved for a reason,most of it brings tourist and such which boost the economy......Lose that and you will have nothing!
Buisnesses come and go.
Would you desecrate a gravesite?How would you feel if someone did this to your deceased family?
Keep an open mind....I understand the pros and cons,but the pros are just a quick solution to make a dollar.
People like you feel the money is more important than learning about culture and the place you live for many years to come
There's a difference between developing land,and destroying history.
Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on March 18, 2008 at 9:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There always are people who say that jobs should trump historic preservation.
I think that is bull. People who want to work can get work -- you don't have to pretend that any particular project cannot stand an archaeological survey, or some special consideration.
One thing we have plenty of in Adams County is space that is not well developed.
Posted by redusmfan (anonymous) on March 18, 2008 at 6:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dd.
I have a job. i own my own company and have an employee that actually lives in Natchez. So, go get a reality check before you jump on me. I will jump back and I will WIN!~!!!!!!!!PERMANENTLY!!!!!!
So, as we have stated, Natchez needs the jobs. Please build there Rentech. do not let any preservationist run you off!!!!!
As far as descrating graves, I have already said that they should stay at least 1000 feet away from the mound and Build on the rest of the site.
Tourism jobs do not mean much to the regular guy in Natchez. Average Joe has not seen the houses on the inside because he does not Care about them,. He is too busy trying to pay the mortgage and buy food for his family to be spending money on touring old houses.
ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on March 19, 2008 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"I will WIN!~!!!!!!!!PERMANENTLY!!!!!!"
WOW Is that a threat, redusmfan?
Nobody said Rentech should not come here.
You don't want to win by arguing against something that nobody said. Makes you look nuts! he,he!
Posted by Dd (anonymous) on March 19, 2008 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Like I said before what is important to me may not be at the top of your list..and so on.
I certainly did not expect someone who has no appreciation for culture and thier surroundings to agree with me..
Everyone is busying trying to pay mortgage and it's a struggle for millions everyday,that does not mean they are all ready to pave every surrounding piece of land for the sake of a few more jobs.
1,000 feet away huh?
Until this site is fully researched and combed over..How do you know where it begins and ends?
You will NEVER win anything until you open up that mind of yours,so you jump back!
Posted by Centerhill (anonymous) on June 24, 2008 at 1:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't live in your area, but have visited from Tennessee a few times in my life. I think it is beautiful and understand why you folks want to preserve it. Attacking Rentech about wanting to build a plant there sounds kind of strange to me. Their process (other than the carbon dioxide) is VERY CLEAN from what I can find out.
Everything is done inside a chamber,The CO2 is then pumped into holding tanks and sent to a pipeline to pump into the oil fields. The feedstock for this plant is petroleum coke that is currently just laying on top of the ground polluting everything, and additionally garbage from the dump will be used as feedstock....what's not green about that? Yes, I am a rentech stockholder (very small amount), but the reason I bought it was in the hope the company would be able to survive and prosper and help this country become energy independent. Rentech looks green to me!
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)