This thread of real sites vs. mock sites brought back memmories of a
graduate class in Cultural Resource Management. In this particular
session we (Prof. and students) were discussing just what should be
done with those sites that are slated for destruction but could not
be completely excavated or slated for excavation at all, due to
sampling strategies. This was a lively discussion, to say the least,
and some suggestions were tossed onto the table (no fear of PC here)
including solutions for collectors! Remember, the discussion centered
around sites that were slated for destruction.
    All the eleven-minute Ned Heite, et. al. lectures aside, that
have come up on this list-serve, it would seem that these types of
sites might provide an acceptable answer to some of the dilemmas
posted in this thread.
   Granted, I have not been in the profession, for a number of years
(I'm in the profession of raising three kids at present)....BUT...
(and speaking only for myself) what I would be doing is to develop a
program that would offer the opportunity to experience Archeology for
grade school students whereby
the artifacts retrieved could be used by the respective school as a
school collection. Yes, this is in a nutshell, and I may be naive to
all the polical hand-tying, but it would seem a solution.
   I would appreciate thoughts and views on this and ice-water, too,
before I start to smell grant propsal money.
   Joanne (not Arthur) Reiter