----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Mouer" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 7:19 AM
Subject: Re: Public Monies

Couldn't help addressing the following message from a different viewpoint.
Even as public archaeologists, our first and foremost obligation is to
accurately interpret the matrial culture of the past because while our
reports may be "dry, boring, and gathering dust on shelves...they are also
destined to become part of the archival record , an element depended upon
heavily by present and future histarchs.  Due to temporal, economic, and
other such restraints that technical report and an updated site file IS
often all the public gets...as accurate a replication and interpretation as
we can provide with limited resources.

Any ideas on how to fund the extra insurance costs required to allow the
public access to most sites under compliance contract .  Where is the extra
interpretive money gonna come from with the specified overhead and profit
margin demanded by most government agencies?  And at the end of all that...
do you realize how long it takes many agencies to pay the archaeological
bills they already owe?

This public archaeology thing seems awfully CLINTONISH BIG GOVERNMENT to
me:):):)

I believe the answer is more grass roots than we think.  To practice public
archaeology is a choice made by each individual archaeo who desires to
maximize what limited resources they have in order to share with the public.
And there will always be good archaeologists who do not want to work under
the eye of the public and those who do.  From this point of view, public
archaeologists have to learn to include the public using what limited
resources are already available which usually means no extra funding.

My views and not DuValls'(although i suspect we share a few):):):)

Dan Sumner Allen IV
Staff Histarch/Mortuary Specialist
DuVall & Associates

> Michael Strutt wrote:
> > Archaeological Institute of America wrote:
> > > If only every phase three excavation came with the obligation and
> > > the FUNDING to publish a anciliary book, brochure, video, etc. for
> > > the public, it would be harder
> > > for people to claim that publically funded archaeology did not
> > > benefit the
> > > people who paid for it.
> > >
> >
> > This is where publicly funded archeology is failing. Public access to
> > the sites and information SHOULD be a part of every compliance
> > contract. If all we do is write exceedingly dry and boring reports for
> > each other - so what? As has been pointed out hundreds of times on
> > this list many of those reports sit on shelves collecting dust and
> > never get read. The way reporting is done currently does not give the
> > public anything. Site tours after excavations are completed and
> > promotional handouts should be standard fare. If that practice were to
> > be the norm imagine what kind of public support we as a profession
> > would have in the halls of government.
> > --
> > Michael Strutt
> > Staff Archeologist
> > Center for Historic Preservation
> > Middle Tennessee State University
> > .........................................................
> > "Work is the curse of the drinking classes" - Oscar Wilde
> >
>
>
> --
> Dan Mouer
> http://saturn.vcu.edu/~dmouer/homepage.htm