Archeology has become a significant way the people of the world are able to take a step

back from the present and look closely at events from the past with a clearer lens than just using

speculation. The methodic and meticulous approach archeology uses offers a variety viewpoints

to look at events of the past and apply them to today. On such way is the use of primary

documents, first-hand accounts of events that were created during that time frame; such being a

news article from the 1940s or a witness can call be a primary source. Archeology also uses

secondary sources, such as books, articles, and letters to paint an even more detailed picture.

Artifacts and on the ground field work also continues to paint this picture of the past that many

historians and archeologists use to look at the future with a more critical eye. It is to this note

that ideas of what to do with archeological sites begin to arise. How do we maintain the site, if at

all, or preserve it for later use, if we should even keep it in its state at all?

As time goes on it takes more and more funds, land, and resources to keep larger sites

undisturbed and intact for further research or preservation, thus providing a demand for more

conservation and protection of archaeological sites. Conservation also happens within

laboratories or museums where artifacts are held and kept within specific holding conditions, as

to keep deterioration away.

Those who keep artifacts are conservators who are highly trained individuals who keep

cultural and heritage collections inside public spaces, such as museums, and in the private sector,

such as laboratories. These men and women keep these artifacts safe in climate controlled

spaces while maintaining documentation and analysis of all the objects and their specific
histories.1 The end goal is to keep archaeological findings preserved and organized. Artifacts

contain an abundance of information about techniques and the materials used in manufacturing,

and in the way, the artifact was used by its former owners or creators. We also can find out why

it was even discarded or left behind with substantial research. Archaeological findings may not

even be something you can hold in your hand as they can be entire landscapes such as the Trail

of Tears in the southern part of the United States.2 These anthropologists study consider the

many questions that surround artifacts and features. Either by preforming studies and tests, or

creating new ways to preserve these records of history, they consistently strive to try and unlock

secrets of the past.

There is a cost, though. Thousands, if not millions, of dollars must be spent to create the

equipment needed and to pay for space just to house these items. There is even land that must be

sanctioned and banned from government or state zoning so that features on the landscape can be

preserved. In Delaware alone there was 1 million dollars spent on the reconstruction of historic

structures within the state.3 Choices like these come at great cost to the people who live inside

these cities as it is their taxes that pay for such costs. There is also the debate of what to do with

ancient paths. Simple trails that the Native people of this land used to travers America hundreds

of years ago. By the time modern archeologists were able to reach these sites and document

them, much had already been overtaken by the spreading cities. It is then up to the cities and
1 Colleen Brady, Conservation Who, What, Were, When, Why and How? https://sha.org/conservation-
facts/faq/conservation/ 2006

2 James E. Snead The secret and bloody war path: Movement, place and conflict in the archaeological landscape
of North America. 2011. Vol 43(3): 478-492

3 Donovan D. Rypkema, Caroline Cheong. Measuring the Economics of Preservation: Recent Findings.
http://www.preserveamerica.gov/docs/final-popular-report6-7-11.pdf June, 2011
governments to decide what to do with these areas. Many archaeologists push to have these sites

protected and preserved for future study and as a historic marker of the United States. Some

sites in question are the war paths of the east coast.4

These war paths are long stretches of woodland and highland trails that stretch up and down the

eastern coast of the USA. Unlike native trail networks that run along the mountains and arid

regions of the western parts of America, sites like the Lolo Trail in Montana or the Trails of the

Pajarito Plateau in New Mexico,5 these sites have very little physical evidence and what is

available is extremely limited. So, with little evidence, but such a rich history it begs the

questions should resources like these simple trails be considered for preservation?

Even though costs can mount in maintaining a site there are several nonprofit organizations out

there that help to cover the cost in some form or fasion. SHUMLA is one such nonprofit

organization that works around the world with other nations to keep people connected with the

lands and their cultural heritages. Since its creation in1998 the SHUMLA organization has

helped over 24,000 people in the United States and Mexico alone though its programs that are

designed to promote and teach using their natural cultural resources.6 Focusing on the lower

Pecos canyonlands for their preservation work, the SHUMLA organization employs many

strategies to help maintain this site and its integrity. The Pecos Canyonlands provide some of the

most well preserved remnants of the lifeways of forager communities in North America. Over

4 James E. Snead The secret and bloody war path: Movement, place and conflict in the archaeological
landscape of North America. 2011. Vol 43(3): 478-492

5 James E. Snead 478-492

6 Angel Johnson, Carolyn Boyd, Amanda Castaneda, Lower Pecos Rock Art Recording and Preservation Project
Last modified 2017 https://www.archaeological.org/news/hca/4471
250 rockshelters are known to house an assortment of rock art, and new sites are discovered each

year.7 The collection of paintings in the area are vast and the variety has made it impossible to

list them into one category as they have been listed into their own separate ones. The record of

this area spans from about 4,000 years ago to the modern historic times of early contact with

Europeans.

To record the rock art the teams must use a variety of tools that thousands of dollars to be able to

purchase and use in the field. Ground penetrating radar, satellite or aircraft imagery all come at a

cost to keep just the record of this site intact and up to date. Another problem that comes in,

other than equipment costs, is when these sites lay on private land, as in the case of the Lower

Pecos, this site rests on private land. This presents the obstacle of the party in question to even

allow someone to come onto the land and dig, or survey or preform any sort of operations within
8
the borders of their property.

When the SHUMLA is creating, and disseminating their findings they create a robust archival

baseline for the maintaining and upkeep of the conditions of the rock art and provide a

preservation and research plan. They collected and documented 19 rock art sites, set up and

collected attribute date for over 1,000 features, and stored over 10,000 photographs.9 Rock art

documentation at the site, though, has never been fully considered complete as there is still more

data and techniques to be implemented as new technologies become readily available.

7 Angel Johnson, Carolyn Boyd, Amanda Castaneda, Lower Pecos Rock Art Recording and Preservation
Project Last modified 2017 https://www.archaeological.org/news/hca/4471

8 Angel Johnson https://www.archaeological.org/news/hca/4471

9 Angel Johnson https://www.archaeological.org/news/hca/4471

With all the work in the Lower Pecos site one had to ask the cost of all the time and labor spent.

The most expensive part of any conservation effort is, indeed, the labor. Most work is boots on

the ground labor and very intensive, since most archaeological conservators in just America

along can charge 50 to 80 dollars per hour. Though the estimates are vastly different over large

ranges. This is due to it being almost impossible to give accurate figures and numbers for some

unseen object or feature. For a burial site the factors could include, but not limited to, rates of

decay, corrosion, the environment it is in, the salinity (saltiness). The prices also include or

assumes that the objects need to be cleaned, stabilized, and made ready for handling and

processing. Even the project director look into all the available options only after the collection

has been fully examined. With the associated costs of disposal, the cost of possible materials that

could be needed, and the special services that come into play they add on an additional 5% to

20% to the labor costs alone.10

In the case of sites like the Trail of Tears, used in the Indian removal in the 19th century, most of

this site is owned by federal or private owners.11 It is in this case where the costs mount even

higher as asking to tear up someones backyard could require some monetary supplementation.

Even the act of trying to preserve an area like this would require enormous amounts of money

and resources.

10 Colleen Brady, Consercation Who, What, Were, When, Why and How? https://sha.org/conservation-
facts/faq/conservation/ 2006

11 National Parks Conservation Association, Trail of Tears Last updated 2017

https://www.npca.org/parks/trail-of-tears-national-historic-trail
So where does archaeology draw the line at preservation? That answer is left to money. If the

site has some significance that can be proved then it is easier to persuade government officials

that this is something worth spending and investing time and money into.
Cite list

Angel Johnson, Carolyn Boyd, Amanda Castaneda, Lower Pecos Rock Art Recording and
Preservation Project Last modified 2017 https://www.archaeological.org/news/hca/4471

James E. Snead The secret and bloody war path: Movement, place and conflict in the
archaeological landscape of North America. 2011. Vol 43(3): 478-492

Colleen Brady, Consercation Who, What, Were, When, Why and How?
https://sha.org/conservation-facts/faq/conservation/ 2006

Donovan D. Rypkema, Caroline Cheong. Measureing the Economics of Presercation: Recent

Findings. http://www.preserveamerica.gov/docs/final-popular-report6-7-11.pdf June, 2011

National Parks Conservation Association, Trail of Tears Last updated 2017

https://www.npca.org/parks/trail-of-tears-national-historic-trail