I have lurked around this subject for a long time and want to get a few shots
in.
 
Historians & Prehistorians
 
As someone who has degrees in History, Antropology and American Studies I
fell I ahve a different view point.
 
A vast majority of the Pre crowd has little or  appreciation of  Historic but
think they can do all the sites because fireld work is all the same. It was
interesting that we hosted, Linda Derry did a fine job, on Historic/Urban and
most of the folks who came already Knew something about the subject. The Ones
who needed to come did not.
 
Historians do not understand what we are up to . Tr to get your committe or
professor to accept a material culture study at one of the standard History
Programs, In amny cases we of the Histarc field are niether fish no fowl and
 maybe are considered foul.
 
If you expect the SHPO's to be the best line of defense think again. Many in
the SHPO offices work hard getting a quality product and there have been some
victories when they are authorised by the state to make guidelines or
regulations. BUT when you are talking about Federal undertakings remember the
requirements for agency archaeolog and  consultants are governed by the CFR
and draft NPS Guidelines. Try to make rules or procedures above these and
watch the agencies squeel . Try to eclude someone from Phase I work that just
meets the CFR/NPS and watch out for the lawyers. Try to get an opinion out of
NPS officials supporting a hard interpretation of Draft Guidelines and listen
to the silence.
 
If you want the SHPO office to help with the proplems of under or un
qualified people Esp in Historic and then you must get your SHPO help from
the state level. Ive been on both sides of the agency fence and I do not
expect significant help from the Govt. in this age of lessening of regs and
fear of takings suits.
 
Long winded and disjointed I speak(Type) up even though I said I would not.
 
I will prob follow the "Noble"  experiment.
 
Jim Parker