Back to Newsletter Page
|
Back to Newsletter Page |
Fall Meeting/Member Information
Music Review
Daily Grind
Places To Eat
Executive Committee Point of View
Legal/Current Issues
Spring Minutes
Upcoming Events
SWCA Environmental Consultants, 230 S. 500 E., Suite 380, Salt Lake City, UT
84102. 801-322-4307. mseddon@swca.com
James
O'Connell,
Vice President Membership & Ethics
Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, 270 S. 1400 E., Room 102, Salt
Lake City, UT 84112. 801-581-3933. james.oconnell@anthro.utah.edu
Kristine
Curry, Vice President Government and Research
675 East 500 South, Salt Lake City, UT 84102, (801) 538-5181, kcurry.tlmain@state.ut.us
Rachel
Quist, Secretary
Directorate of Environmental Programs, Bldg 5330, Room 1516, Dugway, UT 84022,
quistr@dpg.army.mil
Charmaine
Thompson, Treasurer
Uinta National Forest, PO Box 1428, 88 W 100 N, Provo, UT 84601. 801-342-5119.
ctompson01@fs.fed.us
Bonnie
Bass, Newsletter Editor
Utah Museum of Natural History, 1390 E. President's Circle, Salt Lake City,
UT 84112 801.581-3876. bbass@umnh.utah.edu
Steven
Simms, Utah Archaeology Editor
Dept. of Sociology, Social Work and Anthropology, Utah State University, Logan
UT, 84322-0730, (435) 797-1277, ssimms@hass.usu.edu
Matthew Seddon
As we have in the past, this year we have seen how it can work. When called upon, the UPAC body was able to fend off the turf-grabbing bureaucrats at DOPL. UPAC also spoke in a unanimous voice to recognize an avocationalist for his contributions to outstanding archaeology in Utah, thus encouraging more avocationalists to follow scientific practice. UPAC supported the Division of State History in their effort to avoid reductions in file searching services. UPAC has added two representatives from consulting and academia to assist the Interagency Database Committee with changes to the IMACS form. Connections were made at the spring meeting, and many issues were resolved informally and without rancor.
It is my hope that we can build on UPAC’s solid foundation. In the works include efforts by the executive committee to in-creasing UPAC membership and particularly the diversity of UPAC members. We hope to bring even more consultants, academics, and students into the fold. We are initiating efforts to improve member services. We want to make it easier to join UPAC and be more systematic in sending renewal notices, receipt of dues, newsletters, and the journal. We hope to improve the website and the email list-serve as a tool to increase communication between members. We hope to in-crease attendance and participation in annual meetings and occasional debates by taking an active stance on issues of importance to the community. Finally, we also want to sponsor symposiums on issues of importance to us all – such as curation, contexts, and our mutual friend the lithic scatter.
Please join us at the fall meeting in Price to vote on many of these issues and to take advantage of the opportunity to meet one another and remember that we want to be archaeologists first; consultants, academics, and agency personnel second. Bring along your students, colleagues, and employees. The more we talk amongst ourselves, the easier and more cordial it gets. Archaeology is supposed to be fun - UPAC should help us remember that.
FALL UPAC MEETING NOVEMBER 1-2, 2002
The UPAC fall business meeting will be held November 1-2, 2002, at the Prehistoric Museum of the College of Eastern Utah, in Price. The business meeting will begin at 1:00 pm on November 1st. Agenda items may be sent to Matt Seddon, mseddon@swca.com. Space has been reserved for UPAC at the Balanced Rock Eatery and Pub in Helper (148 S Main) following the business meeting. Papers will be presented in the morning on November 2nd. All are encouraged to present papers, including students and USAS members. Papers on current research and CRM projects are encouraged. Please submit your paper title, list of authors, and a short abstract by October 25, 2002, to Kristine Curry, kristinecurry@utah.gov.
UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY
Steve Simms,
Editor
Compilation of the 2002 issue is going well and we hope to be off the press on schedule in March 2003. The 2002 issue will likely be thicker than other issues in recent years. We do have some additional funding to help pay production and printings costs. The Mountain West Center for Regional Studies at Utah State University is doubling their support of the journal from the $500 over the past three years to $1000 per year for the next two years. Thanks to the archaeologists who provide reviews of manuscripts, and especially those who provide the reviews in a timely manner, and/or who take the time to provide authors with some constructive suggestions in addition to the review form. The extra effort is a boon to some of the less experienced authors. It is important that avocationists, students, and even professionals with less publishing experience have the chance to develop their work enough to be acceptable. This often takes encouragement as well as the critical eye that is the heart of peer review.
KEEP IN
THE LOOP- UPAC YAHOO! GROUP
Rachel Quist
The UPAC Yahoo! email list serve was established in August of 2000. The UPAC list serve is an internet gathering place for professional and avocational archaeologists as well as others who are interested in Utah archaeology. Discussion topics include UPAC meeting announcements, UPAC news, pending legislation, and job announcements. Nearly 90 individuals currently subscribe to the list; most subscribers are Utah archaeologists but individuals from Arizona, Louisiana, and Venezuela are also members. Email postings are unmoderated and membership is open to everyone. To join the UPAC list serve:
Click on Join This Group! located in the upper right corner and on the top of the page.
If you have an existing yahoo username (you have an email account with Yahoo!) you simply sign in with your username and password. If you do not have an existing yahoo username you will need to create one. Click on Sign up now.
Create a Yahoo! ID. This profile will identify you when you access the group's Web features (uploading files, etc).
If you do not enter an alternative email address (the email address you want the UPAC emails to be delivered to) while creating a Yahoo! ID, you will activate a Yahoo! email address and by default the UPAC list serve mail will be sent to your new Yahoo! address.
Beware: If you do not want to receive spam mail, you will need to uncheck the box next to “Send me special offers from selected Yahoo! Partners through Yahoo! Deliveries.”
Once you are a member of the Yahoo! Group community. You may elect to join other groups, such as:
MUSIC REVIEW: Nickel Creek Popular Among Archaeological Set
By Jackie Rabb and Bonnie Bass
After a band has been together for over a decade, it’s not often you get three encore sets at the end of a show, with the band members looking like they could keep playing all night. The ages of the musicians might have something to do with it: 25-year-old guitarist Sean Watkins, his 21-year-old sister and fiddler Sara, and 21-year-old mandolinist and prodigy Chris Thile comprise the trio Nickel Creek. The three began playing blue-grass together as children in San Diego; this summer they played a sold-out show at Salt Lake City’s Red Butte Garden. Not surprisingly, several prominent Utah archaeologists were spotted at the concert.
Nickel Creek’s eponymous debut album has sold more than 600,000 copies, and their new album, This Side, is off to a good start. Despite their commercial success, Nickel Creek’s music is difficult to pigeonhole – is their style bluegrass, country, pop, jazz, or some combination thereof? In an August Billboard interview, Thile said, "You'll always hear the basic ambiance and attitude that bluegrass brings with it, but we've added a lot of strange character traits." (This, also not surprisingly, can be associated with several Utah archaeologists.) Sara Watkins calls their music “progressive acoustic.” Whatever you call it, the band has been receiving rave reviews. Rolling Stone’s reviewer predicted: “long after today's hitmakers have faded away, Nickel Creek will still be crafting quality, genre-bending albums like This Side.” On behalf of the many Nickel Creek fans in UPAC, we can only hope this proves true.
THE DAILY GRIND: CURRENT RESEARCH IN UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY
 |
View
of The Deluxe Apartment in the Sky in Range Creek, Utah. See the
next issue of UPAC News for more details. |
BYU
Field School 2002 in Grand Staircase/Escalante National Monument
Joel Janetski, Brigham Young University
Brigham Young University continued archaeology research in south central Utah by holding its annual archaeological field school in scenic and rugged Grand Staircase/Escalante National Monument (GSENM) near the town of Escalante, Utah. The GSENM work is being done under a cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Land Management. This is the second year of three that BYU archaeological field school will take place in the GSENM.
As in past years students participated in survey and excavation. The weather this year was both hot, cold, and windy, but it was especially dry. Students excavated primarily in three areas: Rattlesnake Point, Overlook, both near town on the south edge of Escalante, and Hummingbird Hill in Main Canyon. All sites were Fremont in cultural affiliation. Rattlesnake Point, which overlooks Alvey Wash just south of town, was partially excavated in the late 1950s by James Gunnerson as part of the Glen Canyon Project. The site was chosen because of the presence of Anasazi ceramics on the surface suggesting it might pro-vide information about Fremont-Anasazi relationships. The work revealed two large circular pit houses, one of which had been remodeled into a storage feature as well as a smaller structure lying between the other two.
The Overlook Site, also labeled K2 given its location on top of a small pinnacle. This location provided an un-obstructed view of the Escalante Valley to the north and a measure of exercise for students climbing to the top each day. Digging here was extremely difficult due to the rocks and the rock-hard dirt. Mapping was difficult as well given the abundance of basalt boulders, although the work generated excellent maps of the numerous features on site. The arduous work revealed an unusual square house constructed of coursed basalt stones. The crews also exposed a smaller, enigmatic structure also made of rough basalt stone. It was most likely used for storage. Numerous other rock constructed features and midden de-posits were documented, although none were explored through subsurface testing.
Hummingbird Hill was in Main Canyon several miles west of town. Excavations here hoped to find a pithouse with associated storage features. In-stead crews exposed three badly eroded, slab-lined houses. The architecture is very similar to that seen on Big Flats to the east suggesting contemporaneity with architectural sites there explored by the 2001 field school.
Other excavations consisted of tests at two sites on private land. One of these was an alcove literally in the back yard of the Munson family on the north edge of Escalante. Deposits here reached well over a meter and ex-tended further than crews had time to explore. It is thought that the occupations sampled are Archaic in age. If so, this will be the first Archaic site explored by the Escalante field schools. The second test was of a site known locally as Arrowhead Hill. Two one meter square tests encountered evidence of structures and Anasazi wares appeared to dominate in both.
Survey work provided context for the excavations focusing on Main Canyon, Little Desert just southwest of town, and Cedar Pockets at the base of the Straight Cliffs south and east of Escalante. Crews found or re-recorded about 150 sites, the majority of which dated to the farming period, although occupations dating to the Archaic, Late Prehistoric, Paleoindian periods were found as well.
Block 37, Ogden
Michael Polk
Sagebrush Consultants Sagebrush Consultants, L.L.C., of Ogden, recently completed excavations of historic privies in downtown Ogden between Wall and Lincoln Avenues and 23rd and 22nd Streets, two blocks from the Lower 25th Street Historic District, where some of the earliest occupation of the city (founded in 1851) occurred. The excavation, carried out under the direction of Michael R. Polk, Principal Archaeologist, and Heather Weymouth, Senior Archaeologist, was requested by the General Services Administration (GSA) in anticipation of construction of a new Internal Revenue Service building on the block. The block has historically been a mix of industrial/commercial and residential, but almost exclusively industrial and commercial since the 1950s.
Very few urban historic archaeological excavations have been undertaken in Utah. The deposits to be excavated were estimated to date from as early as the 1870s to as late as the 1920s or 1930s. The earliest of the deposits date to just after the railroad first ar-rived in Utah, bringing with it a variety of manufactured goods not before so easily available to the relatively isolated region. New ideas and people were also brought to Utah with the railroad.
Historic deposits sought on this project were privies, ash pits and a summer kitchen, located behind residences and commercial establishments on the block. Information was recovered which helps answer questions about change and development of the socioeconomic character of the block, sanitation practices on the block including the effect of sewer connections and refuse disposal patterns, as well as household consumption patterns in relation to locally vs. nationally produced goods. Analysis is ongoing for this project with a report to be completed this fall.
Kern River Project
Aaron Fergusson, SWCA
SWCA Environmental Consultants was contracted by Kern River to conduct archaeological mitigations for the Kern River 2003 Expansion Project. The mitigations include data recovery on eight sites, monitoring during construction, creating a GIS database of GLO features in Salt Lake County, preparation of a public document summarizing the archaeology of the Kern River Pipeline (everyone remember the Dames & Moore work in the early 90’s?) and an obsidian hydration study on diagnostic tools collected from sites in the Right-of-Way.
While much of the “off right-of-way” work will not be done until later this year, the data recovery efforts on the eight sites have been going on since early August. The eight sites were scattered between Salt Lake and Washington Counties. As of September 9, we have completed data recovery on four sites, and will be finishing two more by the end of the month. The remaining two are located off the right-of-way and it is anticipated, upon receipt of the permits, we will work there through November.
SWCA’s focus on this project was to examine sites dating to the archaic and late prehistoric periods. Sites were selected based on their potential to answer research questions and fill in gaps in data from previous work done.
Site 42Ws2460 is an Early Archaic Period site, located on BLM land. Excavation at the site consisted of 20 1 x 1 m test units distributed in a stratified, non-aligned sampling strategy, as well as excavation of a 5 x 5 m contiguous block (25 m2). All units were shallow, hitting the solid caliche layer described in the previous report very close to the present ground surface. A geomorphologist also visited the site during the data recovery phase, and con-firmed that the caliche layer was more than 20,000 years old, that no soil or stratigraphic formation had occurred above this layer, and that the surface is likely to be a relatively accurate representation of the site as a whole. The testing and surface inventory did not identify a clear, intact, single-component Early Archaic Period occupation. However, the testing did indicate that sediment deposition was greatest in the western artifact concentration, projectile points were identified during the first Kern project in this area, and additional Early Archaic points were also found during the cur-rent fieldwork phase.
Site 42Ws2174 is a multicomponent site, data recovery was designed to target a Late Archaic Period occupation. SWCA archaeologists under the direction of Scott Edmisten first surveyed the site, identifying approximately 9 artifact concentrations. Two of these were associated with Archaic Period diagnostic projectile points (Elko). SWCA archaeologists then excavated approximately 10 test units of various sizes in the ROW and in the two concentrations associated with Elko Points. Based on the testing, Concentration 6, which contained an Elko point, groundstone, a hammerstone, and a diverse flake assemblage, was selected as the best Archaic Period component for excavation. A 50 m2 block was laid out in this concentration in an area indicated by testing to have the greatest potential to represent an intact activity area. Excavation revealed a shallow deposit (approximately 20-30 cm) of silty sand with artifacts, located over a sterile deposit of hard clay. No features were present. Artifact counts were highest in the center of the excavation block, and declined towards the edges. An Archaic Period projectile point was recovered from the block.
Site 42SL156, is a Fremont site located on private land. The treatment plan stipulated that a hearth identified in the project APE would be excavated prior to construction, primarily as a salvage operation. To summarize work at the site, SWCA did not relocate the hearth, despite carrying out every means at our disposal to do so. Close transects, GIS data, communication with the persons who recorded the hearth originally, and shovel testing were employed in an effort to locate the hearth. Several pieces of fire- cracked rock were encountered, but these were scattered over a relatively large area, and were not associated with any other characteristics of a hearth. At this point, it appears that the hearth that was previously identified may have been disturbed by vehicular traffic not related to the project well before mitigation was initiated.
Site 42Ws2453 is a multicomponent site, data recovery was designed to target a Late Archaic Period occupation. One feature in the western margin of the site was then tested with a 2 x 2 m unit. Testing revealed a collection of FCR but few artifacts, no stained soil, and almost no charcoal. The feature appeared to be severely deflated. 10 test units were then placed over the site, with the majority in the concentration south of the pipeline (and 3 north of the pipeline). These units identified no features and highly variable artifact counts and depths. Little patterning in the artifacts were seen in the test units.Thus, it appeared that the concentration was the most likely locale for an intact Archaic Period occupation, and a 25 m2 block was initiated in that area. The block excavation identified no features, but did recover artifacts, some up to depths of 60 cm bgs. An Archaic Period projectile point was recovered from the block. However, there was no archaeological reason to expand the size of the block, as the artifact densities and distributions throughout the block indicated that we had captured the occupation.
Sites 42Jb394 and 42Ws1579 will be finished later this month. 42Jb394
is a deeply buried archaic site near the Sevier River. Our efforts
have been
focused in a
5 x 5 meter block on a cultural stratum located at 110 cmbgs, with
artifacts located in situ at 167 cmbgs and sterile at 200 cmbgs.
42Ws1579 is a
multicompenent site, and we are focusing three 50 square meter
blocks on several late
prehistoric occupations. Quick turn around on C-14 dates has
assured that we are in the
right place. Look for updates on these sites and the two off
right-of-way sites in
future newsletters and/or UPAC meetings.
4th
and 5th Graders Participate in Antelope Island Archaeological Dig
Ronald
J. Rood, Utah Assistant State Archaeologist
As the kids were
digging I could hear the debate begin. Eleven year old Jade Enright said “I think it is a piece of bone.” Joss Christensen,
also 11 replied, “No way, it is just a regular old rock.” As
it turns out, Jade was right, but this was but one of many similar conversations
taking place at the Mushroom Springs Archaeological Site on Antelope Island
during the month of June.
Students from two area schools recently participated in the Mushroom
Springs Archaeological Project with archaeologists from the Division
of State
History, Antiquities Section.Four students from Newman Elementary in
Salt Lake and
10 students from the Colby School in Park City spent two weeks working
alongside professional archaeologists
and members of the Utah Statewide Archaeological Society.
In spite of near 100 degree days, the students worked at digging, screening, taking notes and making maps of the 1000 year old Fremont Indian camp-site. According to 11 year old Demi Salazar of Newman Elementary, “archaeology is hard work, but this is what I want to do when I grow up.” Of course, not all of the students will be-come archaeologists in their adult lives. Abby Railton, age 10 of the Colby School wants to be a writer and T.J. Harris of Newman Elementary wants to be a fighter pilot. Both of them enjoyed their archaeological experience and according to Danielle Paterson, a science teacher at Colby, “experiences like this will only serve to enhance their lives and provide continued respect for archaeology and history no matter what they do when they grow up.”
“Its not like Indiana Jones, but its still fun” said Adam Webb. Webb, age 15 has been volunteering with the Antiquities Section for 5 years and along with 14 year old Whitney Parker, served as student supervisors for the project.
The Mushroom Springs Site was discovered during a construction project on Antelope Island. The Antiquities Section has plans to continue working on this site for the next few years and plans to continue programs for kids and for interested adults.
MEMBER DUES- Before you throw that card out!
The enclosed card in this issue of the UPAC News indicates your membership status. Remember, dues are paid in January for the following year!
This newsletter has been sent to all past and present members of UPAC as a reminder of the benefits of being a UPAC member. Not only do you get to know archaeologists across the state by being a UPAC member, you also get the chance to voice your opinion on archaeological issues and get the support of a professional organization for is-sues you are involved with. The UPAC News and Utah Archaeology are important re-sources in which all members learn of the fantastic archaeology being done around the state. Don’t hesitate! Become or continue your UPAC membership! Fill in the card with your current information (important for receiving UPAC News and Utah Archaeology!), and mail it along with membership dues to:Charmaine Thompson, UPAC Treasurer PO Box 1428, Provo UT 84601
When I go out for Mexican Food, I don't like to hear the English language. That is just one reason why Molca Salsa in Magna, Utah is one of the best Mexican food places I've experienced while living here in Utah. Located at the south end of a strip mall – yes, there is a strip mall in Magna - at 8000 West and 3500 South, Molca Salsa has an extensive menu, very reasonable prices, fast service, and an atmosphere that re-minds me of Old Mexico. My favorite is the Carnita Plate, but everything I've tried there has been excellent. They don't have a license to sell beer, so if you want, pick up your food to go - they are open 24 hours - and come over to my house down the street for a cool one with Utah's best Mexican fare.
EXECUTIVE COMMITEE POINT OF VIEW
The Utah Geological
Licensing Act and Utah Archaeology
Matt Seddon, President
During the 2002 session of Utah’s Legislature, the Professional Geologist Licensing Act (58-76) was passed. This act stipulates that after January 1, 2003, a license will be required to “practice geology before the public” in Utah. Since passage of the act, UPAC has been working to minimize the impact of the act on the practice of archaeology in Utah, and we have man-aged what could be characterized as an overall victory. However, the act will require licensing for geoarchaeologists, and therefore it could still affect archaeological practice. UPAC needs to vote during the fall meeting to decide what course of action we want to take. A large number of notices on this issue have been posted to the UPAC Yahoo E-group. This article will summarize the situation thus far, and outline the potential courses of action available to us.
The
Act
The act and associated rules (R156-1) can be found at: http://www.dopl.utah.gov/licensing/geologist_sub_page.html.
The act defines “geology” as “the science, which
treats the study of the earth in general, the earth's processes
and history, investigation
of the earth's crust and the rocks and other materials of which
it is composed, and the applied science of utilizing knowledge
of the earth's history, processes,
constituent rocks, minerals, liquids, gases, and other materials
for the use of mankind.” (58-76-102(2)). The act defines the practice of geology
before the public as “the performance of geology including
but not limited to consultation, investigation, evaluation, planning,
geologic mapping,
interpretation of geologic data, preparation of geologic reports,
geologic cross-sections and geologic maps, inspection of geological
work, and the
responsible supervision thereof, the performance of which is relevant
to public welfare or the safeguarding of life, health, property,
and the environment,
except as otherwise specifically provided this chapter.” (58-76-102(3)).
Qualifications for licensure will involve a combination of education, experience, and (after 2003) an exam. The educational requirements include a degree in “geosciences.” With a B.A., 5 years of additional supervised experience are required; with an M.A., 3 years of experience are required, and with a Ph.D., 1 year of experience is required. During 2003, licensure can be obtained simply on the basis of education and experience. After 2003, the applicant will also have to pass “(a) the ASBOG Fundamentals of Geology (“FG”) Examination with a passing score as recommended by the ASBOG; and (b) the ASBOG Principles and Practice of Geology (“PG”) Examination with a passing score as established by the ASBOG” (R156-76-302(d)).
Taken at face value, the definitions of “geology” under the act are extremely broad and could be construed to include archaeological practice. In fact, the Utah Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing (DOPL) initially said as much, arguing that since archaeology involves “stuff in the earth,” it is included under the act. Thus, UPAC was present at a number of meetings of the Geology Licensing Board to try and get an exclusion for archaeological work explicitly written into the act.
An Exemption
for Archaeology
We were generally successful in getting an exemption. The Geology
Licensing Board stated that they never intended to try and license
archaeology,
and were very cooperative and amenable to granting an explicit
exemption. An exclusion has been written into the rules that
reads: “Practice
of Geology before the public does not include the following aspects
of the practice
of anthropology and archeology:
(a) archeological survey, excavation, and reporting;
(b) production of archeological plan views, profiles, and regional overviews; or
(c) investigation and reporting of artifacts or deposits that are modified or affected by past human behavior.” (R156-76-102(5)).
While this article is not intended as legal advice, and I recommend that everyone review the law and rules thoroughly and draw their on conclusions in regard to every practice they undertake, this exemption should cover most archaeological work. It should also cover a lot of ancillary studies (such as sourcing of obsidian artifacts, pollen analysis, etc.) since “artifacts or deposits that are modified or affected by past human behavior” are excluded. We should be pleased that UPAC did score a victory in this case. We were almost required to get geology licenses in order to practice archaeology and our efforts averted that result.
No Exemption for
Geoarchaeology
However, we were unable to get an exemption
for geoarchaeological (geomorphological, sedimentological, etc.) work performed
in support of archaeology.
The Geology Licensing Board and DOPL pretty much felt
that geoarchaeological work was
too close to geology in practice for an exemption
to be granted in the
rules. Despite numerous letters of support for an exemption
for Geoarchaeology from
UPAC members and other organizations such as the
Society for American Archaeology, the Geoarchaeological
Interest
Group of
the SAA, etc.,
DOPL basically shut
the door on gaining an exemption for geoarchaeology.
They argued primarily that such an exemption would
cross into areas
that
should be defined
by the Utah Legislature, and is out of the scope of
what can be done in “Rules.”
As it stands, requiring licensure for geoarchaeologists would affect the practice of archaeology in Utah, particularly for excavation projects done by consultants under NEPA or NHPA. There are exemptions in the general act for purely academic research and for government agency archaeologists. As we see it, for public projects, any geoarchaeological work per-formed would need to at least be “approved” or “signed-off” by a licensed geologist. This involves having a licensed geologist affix a seal to original sets of “geological” maps/profiles, etc., and reproducing said seal in the report. The work doesn’t actually have to be performed by a licensed geologist, but the final report will have to be approved by one who will affix the seal.
There have been a few discussions on email lists and else-where where people have suggested various ways to “get around” this law. Generally, these rely on complicated definitions of geoarchaeology or attempts to slide in under the act through use of various convoluted rationalizations, nit-picky definitions, etc. Archaeologists seem to be particularly good at arguing. However, this law is not a theoretical position to be deconstructed as one would in a graduate seminar. I would not recommend to anyone that they try to slide by or under the act. I met the DOPL enforcement officer, and I can assure everyone that he takes his job very seriously, and he takes the law very literally. He will not buy convoluted arguments and he will vigorously prosecute any case brought before him. Even if you were to ultimately prevail in court, you will have had to fight a long, expensive, and frustrating battle. This is not a course I recommend.
Thus, as we see it, any firm conducting excavations in Utah involving geoarchaeology or geomorphology will need to either have a licensed geologist on staff or subcontract out to one, in order to get the seal onto the geoarchaeology sections and profiles in the report.
Should
UPAC Take Further
Action?
Although
we have generally received the desired exemptions, and the overall affect of
the
act on
archaeology
has been minimized, the UPAC
executive
committee (and a number of other archaeologists
and geoarchaeologists in the state)
has felt that the lack of an exemption for
geoarchaeology can
still be considered an impact on the practice
of archaeology. There are costs
in
time and money
associated with getting staff licensed, and
if a firm does not have qualified staff, there will
be subcontracting
costs.
Additionally,
the qualifications
for licensure are very much geared towards
hard-rock geology, and
many highly qualified geoarchaeologists might
find themselves
having to undertake
additional
study in order to pass the licensing exam.
However, at this point in time, UPAC’s only options are to pursue some form of an exemption for geoarchaeology through a change to the law itself; i.e. legislative lobbying. There are a number of ways we could pursue such a change:
Because any options other than (1) will require relatively significant expenditures of time and money, the UPAC member-ship needs to decide whether and how we want to pursue this. If we don't go with the No-Action alternative, any other alternative will take time, and alternatives 2-4 will take money. The Geology Board gave an estimate of costs to pursue legislative actions that landed in the $1,000-$3,000 range, roughly 30-100% of UPAC's emergency funds. Alternatives (2)-(5) will also take someone's time. Whoever pursues one of these options will be hard-pressed to work on other UPAC issues.
The
Bottom Line
Overall, through
our efforts, UPAC has been able to minimize
the effects
of
an act that
could
have significantly
impacted
the practice
of archaeology
in Utah. We should
be pleased that UPAC carries weight among
other
professional
communities in the
state. However, the
lack of an exemption
for geoarchaeology
will still affect archaeology
in the state.
The question
for UPAC membership
is: How big of an issue is
this
to you?
As a body we need
to decide whether
we
want to
spend additional time
and money on the issue. A
discussion
and vote
on this
issue will
be on
the agenda for
the UPAC fall
meeting. Please
attend, bring
your thoughts, and vote.
Proposal to amend
the bylaws of the Utah Professional Archaeological Council
Rachel Quist
Recent proposals at previous UPAC business meetings have indicated a need to amend the organization’s bylaws. At the fall 2001 UPAC business meeting, Kristen Jensen and Lori Hunsaker indicated that the duties of the Vice President of Membership and Ethics and the duties of the Treasurer overlapped in several capacities and informally proposed amending the bylaws to allow policy to follow current practice. At the spring 2002 UPAC business meeting, a motion was passed to create an annual award system. The UPAC Executive Committee voted on July 19, 2002, to amend the bylaws to include the implementation and management of this award under the duties of the Vice President of Membership and Ethics and to reorganize the duties of the Vice President of Membership and Ethics and the Treasurer.
Language is currently being drafted and the proposed changes will (hopefully) be available at the fall 2002 UPAC business meeting. The amendments will require approval by two thirds of the voting membership.
Briefly, the amendments will:
UPAC Representatives to IADBC
The Executive Committee selected Jim Allison of Baseline and Alan Bowes of Westminster to represent UPAC at the Interagency Database Committee meetings. They will serve as the link between UPAC and IADBC, acting to serve as UPAC’s voice to IADBC and keeping UPAC informed of changes to the way archaeological site data are recorded and stored. Thank you Jim and Alan for accepting this position!
Section 106 Consulting
The Executive Committee wants to inform UPAC members that UPAC can participate as a consulting party in Section 106 cases. Members can raise these issues with the Executive Committee, and the Committee will decide on a case-by-case basis how to proceed and which members would be the most objective in each case.
UPAC Award
In the Spring 2002
meeting, the membership decided that one way to uphold UPAC’s mission
of promoting good archaeology in the state of Utah was to devise an award
system in which archaeologists working throughout the state could be recognized.
Two awards could be given annually, one to a USAS member and one to a UPAC
member. The Executive Commit-tee decided that the Vice President for Membership
and Ethics could take the lead on developing this system. Currently, this
is being developed and will be presented at the Fall Meeting for approval
by the membership. Once the system is ap-proved, nominations for these awards
can begin.
SAA
Government Affairs Committee
Steve
Simms, Utah State University
I am a recent appointee to the SAA Government Affairs Committee. The charge of the committee is:
“ . . . provides archaeological expertise from the membership on a wide range of issues and parts of the country to support archaeological interests on Capitol Hill. Those activities are directed by the Government Affairs Manager, and GAC members and advisors as well as the Board Liaison. The committee recommends policy positions on specific government issues to the SAA Executive Committee.” http://www.saa.org/Goverment/index.html
The committee has links to members at large via the Government Affairs Network State Representatives (GANSR). Garth Portillo has been acting as UPAC’s GANSR for some time. He routinely posts items about legislation and regulatory matters to the UPAC web group. Garth tracks many things of potential interest to UPAC members. Some of them pertain to the SAA Government Affairs Committee and his role as GANSR. One reason for this article is to increase UPAC awareness of the GANSR and the SAA Government Affairs Committee.
After appointment to the committee in March 2002, I monitored the activity of the committee for the first month to learn the ropes. I am still learning and find much of the interaction complex. I did not realize how active the SAA is in making its voice heard on matters of interest to archaeology. What the commit-tee does is respond to requests from the SAA leadership and the SAA lobbyist in Washington for information, insights and opinions on pending legislation. The discussion is done via email and these often involve protracted conversations among committee members and SAA officers. Bob Kelly, SAA President, Lynne Sebastian, the President elect, and David Lindsay, the SAA Manager for Government Affairs regularly participate in the conversations. As I understand it, they interact with the SAA Executive Committee to determine the society’s position on legislation and the strategy for SAA’s involvement.
UPAC members have a chance to track some of the commit-tee’s activities and provide input by subscribing to the UPAC Yahoo group list and using UPAC’s GANSR. The key to enabling UPAC member perspectives and expertise is timeliness. Political news becomes old news very quickly. For my part, I will try to transmit items the Government Affairs Committee is currently working on to Garth (or whoever the UPAC GANSR is). Then he has the option of including them in his various posts on legislative and government issues. Members can communicate their opinions via the UPAC web list.
To get things rolling, here is some information on the committee’s activities in the past seven months. Members should know that information about the committee is also available on the SAA’s web site.
GAC Action Plan 2002 (with annotations in italics about status of items and SAA involvement, but note this was written in August):
Short Term Items
Long Term Items
Continuing Items
Curation Crisis
at UMNH
Duncan Metcalfe, Chief Curator
The anthropology storage facilities at the Utah Museum of Natural History are full. As a short-term solution, the Museum has leased space in a warehouse in downtown Salt Lake City, but this space doesn’t come close to meeting modern standards for security, environmental control, and pest management. Less important, but still a consideration, is the fact that warehouse space is fairly expensive and is therefore a significant drain on the Museum’s limited resources.
It is not clear what the long-term solution to the Museum’s storage crisis is likely to be. A new building may ameliorate the problem, but all the reasonable estimates for additional storage space in a new building suggest the crisis will only be postponed for about ten years. One possibility is that the Museum only accept collections that relate to its mission. That mission, and the rationale for only accepting collections related to that mission, are outlined in Section II of the Museum’s “Collections Policy & Procedures Manual,” available at http://www.umnh.utah.edu/museum/departments/anthropology/archaeology.html.
II.A.
ACQUISITIONS POLICY
The policies outlined in this document pertain to any object of natural
history that is acquired by any of the departments within the Utah Museum
of Natural
History (UMNH or the Museum). The term accession is used specifically
to describe the formal acquisition of objects intended for inclusion
in the
Museum's permanent collections. In accordance with its mission statement,
UMNH maintains permanent collections in the general fields of geology,
biology, and anthropology. The Museum routinely ac-cessions new material
into these
collections in order to improve their quality and increase their utilization.
A primary consideration in the accession process is the provision of
adequate care. The Museum only accessions material for which it can provide
curatorial
care that meets or exceeds minimum acceptable standards, as determined
by the curatorial staff of the appropriate collections discipline. Secondly,
accessions are made with reference to specific collection needs as
determined by the curatorial staff. Other consideration is given to the
needs of
the user community, the research interests of the professional staff,
and any
potential constraints on physical and financial resources.
Note that the Museum does not include the study of history in its mission. Nevertheless, the number and size of collections coming to the Museum from the excavation of historic sites has increased dramatically, and is principal reason the Museum is full today rather than in 2010 as I predicated when I was originally hired as the Curator of Archaeology. The fact is, the Museum does not have the specialized personnel required to cu-rate historic collections. We have Ph.D. level curators in anthropology, biology, and geology; but not history. We have collection managers with expertise in the curation of objects in the three disciplines in the Museum’s mission; but not history. We provide education programs to schools throughout the state in anthropology, biology, and geology; but not history.
However, should the Museum decide to restrict is anthropology accessions to ethnographic and prehistoric objects, it is not clear where historic collections would be curated, or the impact it have on the archaeological community. The purpose of this note is twofold: 1) to encourage archaeologists planning on conducting historic excavations to voluntarily look someplace other than to Utah Museum of Natural History for their repository agreement, and 2) to begin a discussion among archaeologists, historians, and museum curators about how we should deal with the problem of finite space and an accelerating rate of collections recovery.
UPAC Spring Business
Meeting*, April 26, 2002 - Mystic Hot Springs, Monroe, Utah
Submitted by Rachel
Quist
Presiding: Matt Seddon
Meeting called to order at 2:30 pm, 21 people in attendance.
*The following is an abbreviated version of the minutes. A full copy of the
Spring Minutes can be accessed at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UPAC/files/Minutes_Spring_2002.doc
12. Motion to Adjourn: Meeting adjourned, 4:00 pm.
Utah Museums Association
The
Utah Museums Association Annual Conference will be held October 2-4, 2002, in
Park City, Utah at the Kimball Art Center and Park City Historical
Society
and Museum. One workshop will address the curation is-sue facing Utah
museums, with archaeologists and museum presenters participating. Details
of the UMA
conference can be found at http://www.utahmuseums.org/info.html.
Great Basin Anthropological
Conference
The 28th biennial Great Basin Anthropological Conference will
be held October
9-12, 2002 at the Elko Convention Center in Elko, Nevada. Information
about the conference, including transportation, registration, lodging, and
program
schedule can be found at http://www.isu.edu/departments/GBAC/index.html.
For more details contact the conference center at (775) 738-4091.
What’s
in the Basement?
What’s in the Basement? at the Utah Museum of Natural History will take
place on October 19, 2002. The annual event is a unique opportunity to go
into the depths of the museum’s storage spaces to view collections from
all aspects of the natural world, including paleontology, biology, and archaeology.
The Utah Museum of Natural History is located on the University of Utah campus
in Salt Lake City. For more information contact the museum at (801) 581-6927.
Nature
Conservancy’s
Last Great Places: In Response to Place
The Utah Museum of Natural History will sponsor the exhibit In Response to
Place, a traveling exhibit from the Nature Conservancy, from October 16,
2002 to December 31, 2002. The exhibit features photography depicting the
relationship between humans and the natural world. The Utah Museum of Natural
History is located on the University of Utah campus in Salt Lake City.
For more information contact the museum at (801) 581-6927.
Society for American Archaeology
The 68th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology will be held
April 9-13, 2003 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The deadline for submissions has
passed, but information about the conference can be found at http://www.saa.org/.
Special Thanks
A special thanks to all those who contributed to the newsletter. Articles not included in this newsletter will be included in the Spring issue. Please submit any new ideas or topics for the next newsletter before March 1, 2003. Projectile point and groundstone drawings used in the print version of the newsletter were created by Shannon Arnold.
|
UPAC Home | Members Only | Contacts | Membership | About UPAC | Journal | Newsletter | Events & News | Related Links | Site Map | UPAC Store © All content property of Utah Professional Archaeological Council (UPAC). |