Our firm recently received advise from the government department that administers post-invasion (i.e. non-indigenous) archaeology and heritage within the state in which we work. The advice is as follows:

 Consultants proposing to tender for archaeological/heritage consultancies that include a maritime archaeological component must ensure that a qualified maritime archaeologist undertakes this portion of the work. This is critical when assessments of a site's archaeological values or potential must be made, as flawed recommendations may have serious and detrimental impacts on the outcome of site works. 

It should be noted that maritime sites, as defined, include not only include shipwrecks but also jetties, wharves, aeroplane wrecks and navigational structures. 

While no one disagrees with the statement that flawed recommendations may have serious and detrimental impacts on the outcome of site work as this applies to any archaeological work, the advice raises some questions (and please note we are not raising issues regarding the specialized techniques involved in underwater archaeology or preservation of artifacts that have been submersed under the sea, but with analysis and assessment of a site's heritage and archaeological values):

Maritime archaeology, as with any historical archaeology, consists of multiple components and themes. A shipwreck contains cargo, destined for use on land, involving themes such as manufacture, transport, trade and distribution. A jetty or wharf may contain elements relating to entertainment (think Blackpool pier), land based transport (truck and rail), issues regarding landscape; construction materials come from shore based industries and there are many other factors and themes that may be involved. One may ask what is the component in the training of maritime archaeologists that would allow them to make any assessment of the values of such a site that is any more valid than an assessment made by an historical archaeologist and is there a likelihood that by specializing in maritime issues are they in danger of not understanding the land based issues involved? 

I would appreciate any comments on this; also I would like to know if such conditions on the assessment of maritime sites apply in other jurisdictions around the world as we are drafting a reply to the administrative body. . 

Thank you all in advance

John