On the issue of unpublished CRM reports, NPS has had a publicly accessible
database -- the National Archeological Database, Reports module --
available on the web for quite some time that is designed for that "gray
literature."  It's at http://web.cast.uark.edu/other/nps/nadb/nadb.mul.html
and has recently been updated with more than 110,000 records -- bringing
the total to 350,000+ records. While it doesn't provide the full text of
the reports, it certainly is a good place to start.

In case you're interested, Terry Childs and I have proposed a forum on the
issue of access to archeological gray literature for the 2005 SAA meetings
in Salt Lake City.

Mary S. Carroll
Archeology & Ethnography Program
National Park Service
1849 C St NW, (2275)
Washington DC 20240-0001
202-354-2103, 202-371-6485 fax



                      David Douglas
                      <computerwiz1970@C        To:       [log in to unmask]
                      HARTER.NET>               cc:       (bcc: Mary Carroll/WASO/NPS)
                      Sent by:                  Subject:  Re: Sharing our findings....
                      HISTORICAL
                      ARCHAEOLOGY
                      <[log in to unmask]>


                      09/10/2004 06:52
                      PM GMT
                      Please respond to
                      HISTORICAL
                      ARCHAEOLOGY





I am rather new to the list... long time reader.... first time poster...
professionally I work with computers writing software.  I pursue volunteer
opportunities in archaeology.

What about publishing site reports and other materials on the web?  Access
to the materials could be controlled by some sort of authentication scheme
to allow archaeologists to have access but keep the general public from
accessing all the information (think of preventing looting here...).

Anyway... just a thought.  And probably one that has been voice before.

best regards,
David
>
> From: Carol Serr <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2004/09/10 Fri PM 06:04:53 GMT
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Sharing our findings....
>
> Ok, so it took me 10 yrs to get a Full-time job in archy (CRM) (that I've
> had with the same firm for over 15 now)...but that was mostly because I
> wasn't motivated to work full-time...not the fault of the discipline.
>
> As for Andrew's comment below...this is my main gripe.  CRM companies
write
> up their reports that get stuffed away on some shelf or in a box...but so
> few are ever made known to the "public"...so how do we know what has been
> found...without a lot of research and digging (no pun) around...hoping to
> find info on investigations in our area?  That part of the 'system' of
CRM
> sucks (to be vulgar).
>
> Just like the letter response from Mr. Sylvia to Mr.
> Lichtenberger...regarding the dig in VA.  He hasn't seen any "books"  on
> findings of Civil War age sites in his area.  Now I am not familiar with
> that part of the US (only visited when I was 15)...so dont know if in
fact
> his comment is accurate....but I do know out in S. CA...this type
> site-specific information is very lacking...to the general public (I'm
not
> promoting divulging site locations!)...as well as the professionals.  Too
> many of us (out here at least) are working in ivory towers...or isolated
> islands...too competitive (?) to Share our wealth of knowledge.  And
that's
> sad...and needs to be changed....but will it?
>
> Just my opinion.
>
> At 11:17 AM 9/10/2004 -0400, Andrew Sewell wrote:
> >To me, performing the work using a rigorous
> >methodology and making a point to communicate the results of your
findings
> >to your colleagues on a somewhat regular basis is more important than
what
> >sorts of intitials follow your name.
>