Lyle Browning wrote:

"I would put it to the politically active in the membership that there
needs to be a legal definition of an archaeologist, codified in the
Federal laws. Privydigger Eddie can call himself an archaeologist, but
here in VA and I presume elsewhere, he cannot call himself a
hairdresser without first having met the stipulations of the
appropriate Code of Virginia. Perhaps it's time for us collectively to
aspire to at least that stature.

Could not SHA and SAA put their collective heads together to proceed
with getting some forward thinking Member of Congress to sponsor such
legislation?"


There already is a Federal definition of professional archeologist spelled
out in the Code of Regulations (36 CFR 61). Of course, as most know, it
applies only to work done under authority of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and does not affect backyard privy diggers. The
Federal government has the right to place such restrictions on research
done on Federal lands and with Federal funds or permits, but it would never
extend its authority to legislate qualifications for an archeologist in any
other context. Such matters are correctly left to state and local
governments, which also set licensing standards for all other professions
that require such definitions (including my barber). You won't find Federal
law setting qualification standards for doctors, lawyers, civil engineers,
or anyone else except in the context of work done with government
authorization.

For some reason people always point to the licensing of hairdressers as a
good argument for licensing archeologists. I suppose that may reflect a
feeling that cutting hair is unskilled labor, which I don't think is
necessarily true. Many have as much training and experience in their own
endeavor as we do. It's just a different job. Of course, despite having a
licensed hairdresser available, one may still cut a friend or family
members hair in the privacy of one's own kitchen. There's no law against
that, and licensing standards don't apply.

The public can readily see the consequences of poor workmanship when it
comes to haircuts. Certainly there are very serious consequences when a
doctor, lawyer, or engineer is incompetent--people die. Until the general
public shares our view of the consequences of bad archeology, it is not
likely that we will make substantial progress with legislators on
licensing. And even if licensing were to happen by some miracle, it would
never have an effect on an individual digging for recreation on private
property with the permission of the landowner. In some countries all
cultural resources are essentially treated as public property, but the
primacy of private property will never be compromised in the US.

ven


******************************************************************************

Vergil E. Noble, PhD, RPA, Archeologist
Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service
Robert V. Denney Federal Building, Room 474
100 Centennial Mall North, Lincoln, NE 68508-3873
Phone: 402.437.5392x108     Fax: 402.437.5098
office email address: [log in to unmask]
******************************************************************************