Archaeological Monitoring and Historic Preservation

Abstract

Archaeological monitoring has become an integral part of cultural resources management in the United States over the last decade. We have no hard figures on the subject, although if our experience with monitoring in Hawai'i is indicative of the situation in many states-and there is reason to believe that this is generally the case-then monitoring is indeed a significant element in the practice of modern American archaeology. In Hawai'i alone each of the four major archaeological contracting or consulting firms in the state typically will do four to eight monitoring projects per year. 1 Although some of these projects may involve only a day or two of field work, others may require up to several months of daily observation at a construction site. Clearly then, a lot of archaeological field time and funds are spent in the pursuit of this activity. What is surprising is that as far as I am aware, there has been no real discussion by archaeologists of what monitoring is, its appropriateness for CRM, and its limitations. Because many believe that there are serious problems in the way monitoring is employed, the following discussion, based on experience in Hawai'i, is offered in an attempt to clarify the nature of monitoring and its limitations for CRM.