For those of us who work with Section 106, it's the federal agency's responsibility is to see that a "reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts" is made. What's reasonable and appropriate? Like most things that depends on a myriad of factors, not the least of which is who has control over what, but for guidance from the ACHP see http://www.achp.gov/docs/ACHP%20ARCHAEOLOGY%20GUIDANCE.pdf, particularly items 18 - 20, and 24 - 26.
"...it's clear there won't be a one-size-fits-all solution." So true.
Al Tonetti
Cultural Resource Specialist
ASC Group, Inc.
800 Freeway Drive North, Suite 101
Columbus, OH 43229
[log in to unmask]
614-268-2514 x3547
http://www.ascgroup.net/
"Congress finds and declares that...the increased knowledge of our historic resources, the establishment of better means of identifying and administering them, and the encouragement of their preservation will improve the planning and execution of Federal and federally assisted projects, and will assist economic growth and development" (National Historic Preservation Act of 1966).
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sarah Cowie
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 2:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Catch-and-Release Archaeology
Thanks to everyone for their input, both on- and off-list. There are obviously debates surrounding all sides of this practice, and so these thoughtful responses are much appreciated. There are numerous relevant variables and values surrounding best practices in scientific method, stakeholder input, legislation, and economic/pragmatic considerations. This discussion has been very helpful in framing some of the differences, and it's clear there won't be a one-size-fits-all solution. Thanks again for a fruitful discussion.
On Friday, November 7, 2014 6:38 AM, Bill Green <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
In 1979 Bill Butler published a review of what was then referred to as the "no-collection" strategy for survey (nobody could conceive of such a strategy being employed in excavation) in *American Antiquity* (44:795-799). He considered "no-collection" in regard to site integrity, artifact analysis, pothunting, the irreplaceability of resources, and curation. He concluded the strategy was indefensible. It would be interesting to know how proponents of "catch-and-release" respond to these arguments and if new rationales have been developed. (Certainly curation issues are more acute now than they were 35 years ago.)
Bill Green
--
William Green, Ph.D., RPA
James E. Lockwood Jr. Director, Logan Museum of Anthropology Beloit College Beloit, WI 53511 USA http://www.beloit.edu/logan <http://www.facebook.com/LoganMuseum>http://www.facebook.com/LoganMuseum
http://beloit.academia.edu/WilliamGreen
608-363-2119
Fax 608-363-7144
|
