Although I've already done a pretty good job of putting my foot in my mouth this far, I believe that I should do a bit of clarification here...I take issue with the notion that what I was proposing to do is not archaeology, and that it is essentially "ripping" features out of their context with heavy machinery. I think that there may be a bit of miscommunication, which is my fault, but I would hold off on the ethical judgements. This situation is far more complex than I have expessed so far, but I don't believe that its appropriate to go into specifics on the list at this time. 

What I will say is that we have done a great deal of preparation, historical research, and field investigation prior to our contemplation of appropriate excavation methods. We have done our best to establish the context for the features we've encountered, both historically and archaeologically. Again, all features we have encountered so far have been recorded to the best of our abilities. Our problem here lies in our approach towards especially deep features with a high density of artifacts. As I've already established, there are significant constraints upon our time, finances, and site security here, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to compromise my ethics in order to beat the clock and save some cash. 

My primary concern is for the resource, bottom line. As I've said before, the use of heavy equipment isn't ideal, but it is neccessary here. We will hand excavate as much as we can within OSHA guidelines (up to 4 feet without benching or other reinforcement), but there comes a time when it is more efficient and safe to use heavy equipment to aid in digging these deep features. With that being said, I am not in the habit of destroying sites or disregarding context. 

As long as we can do it safely and within OSHA guidelines, we plan to trench outside of the feature with machinery and bisect it by hand-excavating from the outside towards the center. I would gladly consider any other methods that haven't been discussed so far, and I'd appreciate any guidance anyone else has to offer. 

Thanks, 
Jane
-------------- Original message from "William B. Liebeknecht" <[log in to unmask]>: -------------- 


> Jane, 
> 
> Having worked in the northeast for over 20 years and on many urban projects 
> I understand your situation and Ron's concerns. The reality of the 
> situation is that you have to get the most out of the site within the time 
> and budget you have to work within. There has been some great pieces of 
> work conducted by archaeologists over the years using backhoes (Ed Rutsch in 
> New York, John Milner Associates in Philadelphia to name a few). Although 
> backhoes are large pieces of machinery they can be very effective tools in 
> the hands of a good operator guided by an experienced archaeologist. We 
> typically excavate a portion of the properties with smaller block style 
> open-area excavations down to sterile soils followed by stripping to expose 
> trash pits (which are typically single episode events) and shafts (privies, 
> well and cistern). You also tend to pick up drainage features in this 
> manner. At this point the safest way to excavate shaft features is by 
> excavating a sloped (using OSHA standards) trench along the outside of the 
> shaft. As the trench get deeper you simply dismantle one side and reveal 
> the straticgraphic profile removing contexts by last in first out principles 
> (take soil samples for flotation). This method allows sunlight to give you 
> a much better picture of the deposits. Many of these shafts were 
> periodically cleaned and filled quickly in response to local ordinances when 
> city sewer and water were connected. The major fill episodes can be very 
> informative and sometimes you get substantial deposits in the lower portions 
> of the shafts where the honey dippers could not or did not reach. These 
> lower deposits will date to earlier occupations and reveal a different 
> picture of the former residence such as different ethnicity especially with 
> tenants. 
> 
> Bill Liebeknecht MA 
> Principal Investigator 
> Hunter Research, Inc. 
> Trenton, NJ 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jane 
> Lee 
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 12:57 AM 
> To: [log in to unmask] 
> Subject: Re: Urban archaeology methods question 
> 
> 
> I totally appreciate your concern for context, Ron. That is a serious 
> concern for me as well, and that concern is really what prompted my post. I 
> wouldn't rely on heavy equipment if I didn't feel that it was absolutely 
> necessary in this situation. However, Mike has hit the nail right on the 
> head. Although I don't feel that it's a good idea to go into too many site 
> specific details, I'll suffice it to say we are working within some real 
> time, money, and crew constraints. Not to mentions that this area is 
> notorious for being home to some pretty brazen collectors with Bobcats. So, 
> we are looking to be able to record and collect as much detailed information 
> 
> as possible (again, I agree, context IS key) as effectively, efficiently, 
> and safely as possible. Therefore, I'm hoping that there are a few of you 
> HISTARCHer's that might be able to offer some advice, insight, or 
> methodology that could aid in data collection. 
> 
> Sincerely, 
> Jane 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: 
> To: 
> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:38 PM 
> Subject: Re: Urban archaeology methods question 
> 
> 
> > While I can appreciate Ron's appeal to detailed excavation methods, much 
> > of 
> > what one can and cannot do in urban excavations is entirely situational. 
> > If 
> > you have lots of time and lots of money, detailed work is, hands down, 
> > most 
> > important. That is not usually the case, though, and you have to opt to 
> > get the 
> > highest return for the effort. 
> > 
> > We had a situation in Ogden some years ago where we were allowed only a 
> > week 
> > or so to excavate up to 25 privies, ash pits and cultural midden areas in 
> > a 
> > late 19th-early 20th Century residential area. We put a lot of effort 
> > into it, 
> > but used heavy equipment where we could to expose and dig around the 
> > perimeter 
> > of identified features. We were kicked off of the site before we could 
> > finish 
> > and ended up leaving many privies unexcavated. They were subsequently 
> > bulldozed for construction. 
> > 
> > While you want to control the context of the data you reteive as much as 
> > possible, time and money will end up dictating, to some degree, what you 
> > can and 
> > cannot do. 
> > 
> > Mike Polk 
> > Sagebrush Consultants 
> > Ogden, Utah 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message. 
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 3/10/2006 
> > 
> >