Archaeology and Curation: Guidance
Accuracy of In-Field Artifact Analysis
- An Experimental Test of the Accuracy and Adequacy of In-Field Artifact Analysis - Report, 2013 (Legacy 11-157) [2.60 MB]
This report discusses the validity of the assumptions made when, for the sake of conserving funding and curation space, in-field artifact analysis is used over lab analysis of artifacts in western states. Because test results showed that in-field and digital photo analyses of artifacts are of low accuracy and often inadequate for site interpretation, a set of recommendations is made for deciding how and in what situations field analysis is best applied. Michael Heilen; Jeffrey Altschul; Bradley J. Vierra; Rein Vanderport; Robert A. Heckman.
- The Accuracy and Adequacy of In-Field Artifact Analysis: An Experimental Test - Summary, 2013 (Legacy 11-157) [62 KB]
Assessing Potential Damage from Military Training Activities
- Integrating Military Training and Archaeological Site Integrity: A Field Analysis Approach - Report, 2012 (Legacy 10-435) [2.55 MB]
The purpose of the study was to identify factors useful for assessing potential damage to archaeological sites resulting from military vehicle training activities and determining acceptable thresholds for these activities, to assist the DoD in sustaining critical military training while complying with cultural resource stewardship responsibilities. The report specifically addresses soil compaction and examines physical evidence associated with vehicle ruts and the implications for artifact displacement and stratigraphic mixing drawn from that evidence. Brian Crane; Dennis Knepper; Christopher Bowen; Bernard K. Means.
Using Data Analysis to Protect Site Integrity
- Integrating Military Training and Archaeological Site Integrity: A Data Analysis Approach - Report, 2011 (Legacy 09-435) [1.01 MB]
This project identified practical methods to measure impacts of military training activities on archaeological resources on DoD installations with the goal of sustaining these activities while complying with cultural resources stewardship responsibilities. Bernard K. Means; Dennis Knepper; G. William Monoghan.
Site Monitoring & Conditions Assessments
- Development of DoD Guidance for Archaeological Site Monitoring and Condition Assessments - Report, 2011 (Legacy 09-442) [5.92 MB]
Monitoring the condition of archaeological sites is required under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Article 15 of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, and Executive Order 13287; however, this responsibility is often overlooked in favor of funding the identification and evaluation of archaeological resources. This report presents best management practices to ensure consistent data collection and to aid in prioritizing future site treatment actions, and tools to assist current CR managers with monitoring tasks. Versar, Inc.
Treatments to Arrest Archaeological Site Deterioration
- Prioritizing Site Treatment Actions - Report, 2012 (Legacy 10-122) [1.23 MB]
Building on the results of Legacy project #09-442 (recommended procedures for a program of archaeological site condition monitoring), this project developed site treatment protocols designed to prevent further deterioration of sites on DoD lands. In addition to typical site treatments such as stabilization, burial, or mitigation through excavation, this report examines landscaping around sites to change erosion patterns or divert pedestrian traffic, as well as education programs or enhanced site monitoring to prevent/deter site vandalism. Brian Crane; Christopher Bowen; Laurie Paonessa; Eric Griffitts; Dennis Knepper; Bernard K. Means.
Protecting Archaeological Sites on DoD Lands
- Protecting the Past to Secure the Future: Best Management Practices for Hardening Archaeological Sites on DoD Lands - Report, 2007 (Legacy 06-303) [9.79 MB]
This report provides best management practices for protecting archaeological sites while allowing access for military training through well-established and new and innovative techniques. Heather Wagner; Laurie W. Rush; Ian Warden.
Survey Standards and Cost Estimation
- Archaeological Inventory Survey Standards and Cost Estimation Guidelines for the Department of Defense - Fact Sheet (Legacy 92-302) [364 KB]
This fact sheet describes a report intended to establish standard definitions and procedures for conducting intensive inventory survey of archaeological sites; recommend contracting and cost estimation guidelines for proposing, budgeting, and scheduling archaeological inventory survey; provide quantifiable and statistically defensible methods for conducting inventory surveys on Department of Defense lands by focusing greater attention on the issues of site definition, survey intensity, and the use of appropriate site discovery procedures for given land surface conditions and archaeological resources. Unattributed.
- Archaeological Collection Sampling and Discard Protocols - Report, 2018 (Legacy 16-789) [831 KB]
This report was written to develop guidance on how to slow the growth in volume of materials requiring long-term curation and allow for future efficient management of collections of undetermined, little or no research potential. Guidance is given to relate collection management plans to associated project research designs. These guidelines should be distributed to DoD cultural resources subject matter experts and cultural resources managers for implementation. The best practices presented would be implemented at the time of collection by the archaeologists who conducted the fieldwork. This will help reduce collection size in a well-documented fashion and help make future deaccessioning more efficient. Brian Crane.
- Archaeological Collection Sampling and Discard Protocols - Fact Sheet, 2016 (Legacy 16-789) [150 KB]
- Guidelines for Field Collection of Archaeological Materials and Standard Operating Procedures for Curating Department of Defense Archaeological Collections - Report, 1999 (Legacy 98-1714) [2.19 MB]
The project compared existing federal and non-federal guidelines for collecting archaeological field data and curating archaeological collections, leading to the development of DoD-wide guidelines for collecting archaeological field data and Standard Operating Procedures for curating DoD archaeological collections (generally following 36 CFR 70 regarding curation, but sometimes adjusted to address the unique collections management challenges facing DoD). Suzanne Griset; Marc Kodack; Ken Alldredge; Dennis Danielson; Natalie Drew; Debra K. Loveless; Michael D. Wiant.