Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 3 Mar 2000 10:10:10 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
What is the equality in the law when it is not applied equally to all
situations? Not very good law, nor very good for the reputation of its
administrators. A current, now occurring, particular example is illustrative.
A historic district needs monitoring of its disturbance resulting from the
upgrading of utilities. Previously excavated and filled areas are required to
be overseen at whatever cost, day or night, whatever it takes and whatever it
costs because in some way, the previous excavations have to be continued to
provide continuity in the defense of archaeological intervention and
mitigation.
On the other hand, daily disrespect seems to be case when it comes to native
peoples archaeological testing. Not 100 miles from the above case, in the
same state and historic area, and in fact an even older district or town (the
oldest incorporated town in that state) across the street from the
reservation there and next to a prestigious school, a property is basically
walked over and written off without any monitoring at all of the impacts from
the suburban tract development. The landscape there is arguably and
certifiably older than the "historic district" by the law's description of
the means of evaluation of these properties, yet the illogic of the choice of
methods is what shines through instead of the stated purpose of the laws to
begin with, that is the adequate evaluation of significance.
When and how is monitoring implemented and why can it not be part of the law?
Every excuse by most archaeologists does not hide their disdain for the
"collector" who follows the dump trucks to the landfill as history as well is
prehistory is carted away because the laws are inadequate, and much more is
present than the archaeologist, in fairness, is allowed to examine.
These observations are not necessarily based in specific fact, but as they
appear to me from experience and the recent arrests of natives protesting the
development as depicted in the newspapers, along with my own experiences with
them at their "pow -wow" the only reported one by the Federal Commerce
Department at one time.
This particular area once hosted many spy fishing boats off its coast when
territories were considered much closer and aircraft flew test flights over
the ocean. The feeling that it was sort of America's "front porch" developed
and today it is still thought of as such. Is this the face America presents
to the anthropological world, that comes to its front door? Should we really
believe the laws are enough to protect the "First Americans?"
George Myers
|
|
|