Stone pieces found on a hill above Walker, Minn., don't look like prehistoric tools, don't indicate the earliest human habitation in the state and don't even make the hill an archaeological site, the state archaeologist said Monday.
Mostly what was in an earlier post. But there are a few more tidbits:
Sue Mulholland of Duluth, an owner of an archaeological firm and president of the Minnesota Council for Archaeology, said of Anfinson's conclusion, "I think he's slamming the door a little too soon."
Some people in Walker, a county seat of about 1,100 people 190 miles north of Minneapolis, think the site could become a tourist attraction.
Errr. . . to see some glacial stratigraphy and a few rocks?
However, David Mather, the state's archaeologist for the National Register of Historic Places, who was involved with the Walker site, said most archaeologists he talked with felt there were some genuine artifacts, or items they did not feel comfortable dismissing.
But Mather added that "none of the artifacts are what we would call a museum piece, I suppose."
The Walker City Council, which was to discuss Anfinson's report Monday night, has agreed to leave the site alone and access the community center from hilltop streets.
Mather said his office and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Development branch still believe the site should be preserved for further examination.
"We can professionally disagree," he said. "[But] if it's gone, it's gone forever, and all it will be is a question mark."
Probably a good idea.