Jim,

I recently forwarded an item to the list about the outsourcing of
archaeology professionals at NPS. This was a National Coalition for History
newsletter item that ended with actions concerned citizens - and
archaeologists - could take (see below). While I agree with you that this
is one of the most important topics this list could take up, I also hope
that this act of democratic participation is what our colleagues would do
first. Perhaps once they have done this, they could join in the discussion.
If it is a choice of one or the other, while both are important, I think
the former currently deserves priority:

<Individuals and organizations wishing to express their views on outsourcing
"professional" positions should write: the Secretary of the Interior Gale
Norton and NPS Director Fran Mainella both at Department of the Interior,
1849 C Street NW, Washington D.C. 20240; For Secretary Norton -- fax:
202.208-6956; e-mail: [log in to unmask]; for Director Mainella -- fax 202.
208-7889; e-mail [log in to unmask] . Members of Congress should be
contacted not by letter but via e-mail or fax (for a listing for members of
Congress via zip code, tap into: http://www.house.gov/writerep/ and
<http://www.senate.gov/>.

Having said that, we would all be better informed if our colleagues in NPS
'could' bring insight to this issue. However, the jobs in question are
filled by archaeologists who 'may' feel constrained in taking part in this
debate to a degree. This could be for various reasons:

They may fear that pleading to the profession to save these jobs for the
sake of the cultural resources could be viewed by some as only special
pleading 'to save my job'. So, for appearances sake, this segment of our
profession may not feel as free as you or I to chime in on this crisis in
our profession. If so, this would be a shame for those of us who need and
want more information about what is going on.

Also, federal agency employees are not allowed to lobby Congress. It is
probably safe to say that while NPS archaeologists can, as individuals,
lobby Congress and also lobby for action within their profession, some
agency archaeologists may not speak out for fear that it could be
problematic for them. With the guillotine so near, it is possible that they
are being overly cautious.

Then again, post the rounds of cut backs during the last administration
(almost a dozen archaeologists down-sized in the Mid-Atlantic region alone
when the NPS Denver Service Center went from a total of 800+ to just over
200+ in personnel), the surviving archaeologists are likely too busy doing
the work of these lost others to join in. (As I understand it, the
Mid-Atlantic group was outsourcing close to %70 of their work and were
still closed down.)




At 08:33 AM 2/4/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>Ron and Fellow HistARCHers:
>I do understand that there are laws requiring the federal government to
>consider the effects of its actions on sites that may be eligible for
>National Register status. Whether the paperwork is filled out by an
>archaeologist who meets the Secretary's standards or by President Bush's
>mum, the federal government must comply and when it does not, it is up to
>the professional and avocational supporters of archaeology to take action:
>political, through their Congressional representatives, and legal, through
>the courts. Come to think of it, that is true whether there is a
>professional minding the store or not.
>
>In any case, the issue should not be about the
>indispensability/dispensability of federal archaeologists. We need to take
>that as a given and focus on demonstrating the productive relationship
>that, in most cases, results in very inexpensive contributions to American
>cultural and intellectual life. A positive, proactive (to use a
>bureaucratic term of uncertain value and meaning) stance--all of the time
>and not just when jobs are threatened--will secure a future for agency
>archaeology, not a periodic rear-guard action that constantly defends the
>value of federal involvement in archaeology.
>
>Finally, the apparent lack of interest in this subject by list members
>suggests that most do not see the proposed reorganization going anywhere,
>or tacitly approve of the proposal.
>
>Jim
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Ron May
>Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:04 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Agency Archaeologists Job Cuts
>
>Jim,
>
>You say you agree, but you do not seem to understand. I believe the goal
>of the Bush Administration is to eliminate the "annoying little gnats"
>that cause expenditure of federal money for archaeology and historical
>surveys. Eliminate the people who review funded projects or manage
>scheduled maintenance of buildings or compile Section 110 inventories and
>you eliminate the need to spend money on contractors. You dont seriously
>believe they are going to replace NPS archaeologists with contractors 1:1
>do you? Those billets are going to be vacant. The supervisors will find
>some paraprofessional fire-fighter to fill out the required paperwork.
>
>Ron May
>Legacy 106, Inc.