Sorry, my response was directed at the level of your question. What sort of specifics would you like in regards to your general complaint? 

For one thing, I'm not too concerned about neighbors or other locals or another site - I'm concerned about multiple occupations on a single site. If we're talking about historic period occupations and I have three families that inhabited a site over a period of 100 years, it's critical to know how the assemblages from those three families (with potential diverse ethnic and economic backgrounds) will be distinguished one from the other. If a research question is directed at a site through the use of the entire assemblage for that site, rather than by separation between occupations, the question is in all likelihood invalid. This level of fine-grained analysis can get at changes in site structure as well - if features that suggest specific activities can be dated to individual families, we can see change to, say, market access in an area that is becoming more urban over time.

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 sent
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ethics question

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.