David S. Rotenstein wrote: a firm in Pennsylvania conducted work on a historic s
ite
without the benefit of a historic sites specialist on staff. He quoted a missive
 from
the lead agency that specified that such a specialist was not required.
 
My question is: Did the report meet the standards and guidelines established by
or for
the lead agency? Or, more specifically, did the report adequately describe the r
esearch
design, results, analyses, interpretations, and recommendations? If not, it real
ly
doesn't matter who wrote the report, it is no more adequate than if it were writ
ten by
someone who identifies him/herself with historical archaeology.
 
If an historical archaeologist conducts limited test excavations on a blacksmith
 shop
site, should that person be subject to a ROPA/SOPA grievance for lack of trainin
g in
industrial archaeology? Is an industrial archaeologist with extensive experience
 
recording and interpreting the mills of Lowell, Massachusetts, any better suited
 to dig
such a blacksmith shop site? Can a compliance archaeologist, particularly one op
erating
a 'dining room' operation, survive by specializing in such narrow areas? I excav
ated a
cheese factory site in central New York State some years ago with some colleague
s. Let
me assure the list members and would-be judges, none of us had any prior experie
nce in
this area, nor did we know of anyone who had. Fortunately, bright folks that we
are--or
at least were--we did some preliminary research. You can find the results summar
ized in
an article in Historical Archaeology 24(1) [1991] and judge for yourself.
 
I maintain that the appropriate place to enforce high standards of ethical behav
ior,
good science, and conscientious historic preservation is at the level of review.
 Those
assessments occur at least five days a week, 52 weeks of the year. Got a problem
 with
the standards established within a specific jurisdiction? Enlist the aid of your
 state
council and avocational organization and work to change those standards. SOPA/RO
PA
standards will not improve the review process, only knowledgable agency represen
tatives
backed by their own standards and guidelines can truly insure the high quality o
f
archaeological research. Besides, if representatives of a lead agency do not fin
d
sufficient fault in someone's work, who else is likely to file a grievance? I su
spect,
but cannot prove for lack of data, that SOPA's track record bears this point out
 very
well.
 
Jim Gibb
Annapolis, MD