Some of the recent postings regarding SOPA and ROPA seem to have been
written from the perspective that 1) the ROPA proposal is primarily an SAA
initiative and 2) the SOPA/ROPA standards represent an attempt by academic
archaeologists to dictate proper procedures to consultants.
 
On the contrary, the initial concept of ROPA sponsorship came out of a
joint meeting of the SOPA and SAA Ethics Committees and was initially
proposed by some of the SOPA members.   The ROPA Task Force, which drew up
the current proposal, had equal representation from SOPA, SAA, SHA, and
AIA.   If the SOPA membership had not voted to accept the ROPA proposal, it
would not have gone further.  In the next few weeks, SAA and SHA members
will vote on the proposal.  If either group turns it down, ROPA will not be
established, and SOPA will remain as it was.
 
 The  ROPA standards will initially be those already in use by SOPA.  The
membership of SOPA is broad-based, but a majority  are consultants; hence,
neither the SOPA nor the ROPA standards can be attributed to a group of
academic archaeologists.    If ROPA is established, any changes in the
standards would be made by the ROPA board, not by any of the sponsoring
organizations.  The SOPA/ROPA standards apply to academic archaeologists as
fully as they do to professionals employed outside the academy; in fact,
SOPA took the lead in developing standards for academic field schools.
 
Bill Lipe