there is a lot of a spectrum in "what kind?"
its not enough to say "kitchen" "domestic" "industrial"
one has to split those to get anywhere above low level discussion which is
insufficient imho
in other words in domestic site- have you done the right description to
separate one neighbor from another or another group of locals
yes I found a kitchen our house or barn or factory is next to useless for
all but presence or absence work
but all presence or absence work needs to describe site structures
sufficiently even if presence or absence is the question of the moment.
Conrad Bladey
Peasant
Professional Archeologist
-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Daniel (KYTC)
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ethics question
I usually wait for an evaluation or a mitigation before coming up with a
research design. For mitigations, I require testable hypotheses with the
means necessary to answer research question clearly spelled out - as in how
many, what kind, what age, required feature and artifact types, etc.
Daniel B. Davis
Archaeologist Coordinator
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet
Division of Environmental Analysis
200 Mero Street
Frankfort, KY 40622
(502) 564-7250
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carrig,
Charles - NRCS, Casper, WY
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 3:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ethics question
It should be as simple as writing a research design grounded in the
quantitative with learned questions asked. Instead, we all too often see the
lackadaisical generalities that in themselves are not answered with the
report.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of sent
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:51 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ethics question
At a point not doing requisite science moves one closer and closer to
unscientific pothunters. We don’t need that. State of the art requirements
and I mean beyond presence or albescence research designs would not create
any grey areas. The scientific high ground must be maintained. As science
progresses so should reporting and analysis. From what I see in average
reports this has not happened. It needs to. no excuse for it not to be If we
as professionals want to be given priority in life to access. It is like my
doctor-he needs to be current or not at all. Seeing archeological reports
little changed after 30 some years casts a great shadow.
Conrad Bladey
Peasant
Professional Archeologist
-----Original Message-----
From: geoff carver
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ethics question
Not just firms; also state services cutting budgets, cutting staff. Parks
Canada provides a good, recent example. Also a few interesting cases here in
Germany.
-----Original Message-----
I suspect that attitude has developed, though, by firms being asked to cut
budgets to a bare minimum. When the governing agencies and clients are
strapped for cash, that's naturally going to affect how the work is done and
it doesn't usually leave much room for deeper research. It's unfortunate in
my opinion, as it severely limits the types of research that are funded in
this realm. I always appreciate firms who use their own funds to do
additional research on the side and present their findings at conferences,
etc. It's not always easy to make that happen.
This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely
for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message
or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law
and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the
email immediately.
|