I am pleazed to see that David Breetzke seems to agree with me.  But before I
have someone right a chain of title, I would like for them to have been
trained in such research, as Mr. Heite sugests.  Until now this trayning is
dun by our residence historian, and it takes a half dozen or so projects and
lottsa fone calls befour we let anyone do them on they're own.  Her spelling
is better than mine, two.
 
 
Tom Wheeton ;-)
_________________________________________________________________
  I agree w/ Tom W., but would add a slightly different spin.
  One CRM class is a start, but not nearly enough to make a
  professional.  CRM work requires a wide array of additional skills
  and practical knowledge beyond academic creditionals.  Federal
  agencies with archaeological staffs spend quite a bit of time
  assessing and weighing personnel qualifications provided in
  contractors' proposals against project needs and regional research
  norms. Part of that assessment picks apart how a CRM firm is
  organized & at what level interpretation of information occurs.
  Appropriate academic creditionals satisfy step 1 in the selection,
  but successful, on-the-job experience with similar projects or
  similar resources frequently decides the winner in a competitive
  technical rating system [as opposed to a straight low-bid system].
  High quality is not only good archaeology, but good business.
  No agency wants the experience of locating sites during construction
  which could have been predicted by top quality literature, records
  or map research.  Mistakes are VERY expensive, and in the end, poor
  use of public funds as well as damaging to the resource.
  Carroll Kleinhans
 
  How'd I do on spelling, Tom?  We could move on to punctuation, I
  suppose. Nah(sp); who has time?