I know this may be a dead discussion thread, but as an archaeologist who works in western New York, the "big dig" vexes me, and I felt the need to vent.   The project was organized by Tim Tielman, a prominent local historic preservationist who has long fought for the re-development of the Commercial Slip and Erie Canal terminus into a heritage tourism site.   While his efforts to bring businesses and tourist dollars to Buffalo is admirable, I am concerned with some of the information presented by Allen Olbert's recent newspaper article, and the possible impression that it gives about local archaeology.
 
First, the article alludes to the oversight of the whole project by trained archaeologists. In one passage, Olmert writes" Such marks were telltales  
signs to the practiced eyes of artifact screeners who kept watch on  
the proceedings". I'm not sure any professional archaeologists were actually involved in the "Big Dig", though I could be mistaken.  If anybody out there participated in this event, please let me know.  
 
Second, regarding the 200 truckloads of debris removed from the site, Olmert suggests that "Although its removal was a necessary part of the restoration of the slip, it was originally hoped that the debris could have a proper going through on site. But that was denied by the state overseers of the Inner Harbor project, and for a time it appeared that this historic material was doomed to vanish in oblivion in a Tonawanda landfill".  
 
According to this statement, it would appear that no archaeological mitigation had ever taken place; A travesty indeed!  However, the Empire State Development Corporation has published the SEQRA Statement of Findings, Supplemental Final Environment Impact Statement, as well as a copy of the Phase II / III cultural resources site examination and data recovery project that includes information on archaeological work conducted at the site from as early as 2000.  PDFs can be found online at:
 
http://www.nylovesbiz.com/popup/features.asp?id=15
 
 
During the previous mitigation projects, a percentage of the overall site area was excavated and the results of that excavation were published not only in the realm of the "grey literature", but also on a public web site. Therefore, I am not exactly sure what is meant by a "proper going through", though I'm inclined to think that this means a 100% site sample of the entire commercial slip.  For anybody who knows the business of contract archaeology, the sampling of, say, a 3% overall sample would be rather expensive.  Though Tielman may not be aware of the real costs of a professional archaeological investigation, I am pretty sure that he knows about the archaeological project himself; A 2005 Buffalo News article written by Mark Sommer reports that Tielman was aware of the archaeological project, though disagreed with the testing strategy. 
 
http://www.cirelec.com/Tools/BroadCaster/Upload/Buffalo%20News%20Article(1).pdf

 
The Sommer article states that Tielman's offer of hiring somebody to go through the commercial slip fill was rejected by the Empire State Development Corporation citing "safety, liability, and logistical concerns in denying the request".  Thus, the "Big Dig" was concocted in order to retrive artifacts from the Commercial slip fill soil.  Interested members of the public paid $ 5 -10 dollars to “volunteer” to sift through the unprovenienced back-dirt, from which they were permitted to keep one (1) artifact.   Though Tielman may have achieved his goal of collecting pretty artifacts for his museum, and making a few bucks on the side, I think that this whole thing, Olmert article included, casts local archaeology in a poor light.  
 
First, the premise behind the “Big Dig” ignores fact that an actual paid mitigation investigation actually took place at the site. Second, a fee was charged for all “volunteers”. Third, people were allowed to keep artifacts, potentially encouraging looting of other sites; and finally, although I do not have specific evidence for this, as a CRM archaeologist working in western New York, I have come to expect that soils buried on sites previously used for industrial and/or transportation purposes (e.g. railroad) are more likely to contain undocumented hazardous materials.   Therefore, exposing members of the public (as opposed to field techs) to potentially contaminated soils without proper protection, or at least without the knowledge that one should thoroughly wash one's hands after sifting the dirt and before eating, is simply negligence.  That being said, I am not sure if there is anything that could or should be done about such “events”, besides having local firms offer more visible public outreach programs. 
 
If anybody is still paying attention to this thread, was involved in the project, or has any additional information on what is going to be done with the recovered artifacts, please post it to the list. 
 
Sincerely, 
 
Ryan F. Austin, M.A., RPA
Project Director
University at Buffalo Archaeological Survey
 
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.