Michael,
 
About the 19020th century farmstead sites, it seems real
odd to me that C. Ewan and others are so willing to dismiss
a borad class of archaeological sites in a part of North
American where there are virtually no laws guaranteeing
that there will be anything saved for the future?
 
When I began working as an Environmental Management Specialist
(archa/hist spec) for the County of San Diego in 1974, there
were tens of thousands of acres of "Diegan Coastal Sage SCrub,"
a biological habitat that has now been reduced to a mere 10%
of the original 1974 population.  Now the land develoeprs and
Congress are fighting to eliminate the Endangered Species Act
because there are birds and plant species with less than 1000
specimens in the World due to massive bulldozing and wasteful
habitat destruction.  Only now is there a movement to protect
by landbanking some of the habitat to save the declining
species.
 
The point to my story is that Ewen et al can be irresponsible
by dimsissing 10,000 homestead sites today, but probably would
be hated by future generations of archaeologists fighting to save
last 500 homesteads in the 21st century.  Believe me, it could happen
over night.  I once heard a government employee from a California
desert community lament that 100,000 homes were built in a small
valley in one year, wiping out hundreds of prehistoric archaeo-
logy sites.
 
Yes, and while management plans are nice, as explained by \Linda Derry and
Hester Davis, the big question is whether there will be teeth in the
laws to guarantee there will be a few homestead sites to be
studied in the future.
 
Yes, it is true that post-World War II generations are a
"Throw Away Society."  I for one am appalled.
 
Ron May c/o
[log in to unmask]