When I posted that it is estimated that there were only 11,000 archaeologists working in the USA, pre-crash, several people made the comment that it seems like so few for such a big country.
“….it is pretty astounding to think that there are only 11k archaeologists pre-crash in that huuuuuge country.” – Rachel on BAJR facebook group.
The UK had roughly 7,000 archaeologists in that same time frame (pre-crash) with only a population of roughly 64 million people (2014) covering 242,900 sq. km. (land). America by comparison has 318 million people (2014) and covers 9,826,675 sq. km. (land) (sources: populations here and size here).
Edit- after a brief twitter conversation I realize that if you did not read the first post I wrote some of this might not make sense. Quick catch up- 11,000 archaeologists is everyone who is a professional (gets paid)- CRM, Academics, etc. 90% of archaeologists in the US are in CRM. So the reasoning below is aimed at CRM archaeologists- who making up the vast majority of professional archaeologists, in the US and the UK, thus have the greatest impact in raw numbers. Non-CRM archaeologists are a whole different ballgame.
Why?
The reason is simple, laws. In the UK heritage protection laws cover almost everywhere, now even marine as well. Effectively, the UK government owns everything six inches below the ground ( a simplification but it works). In Scotland, it owns all lost objects, except recently lost coins, which covers any ‘artefacts’ that come out of the ground, via excavations or erosion or metal detecting or whatever. Moreover, Commercial Archaeology can essentially be required for any sort of development project in the UK, even on private land.
In the US it is much more complicated. Any sort of development on Federal Government land is covered by the heritage protection laws. However, this only applies to Federal land and projects that involve Federal money or require a federal permit (surprisingly, quite a few projects are covered by these last two). Each state has its own set of laws which cover the land owned by the states. In some cases, local laws exist as well but they vary in quality and enforcement. For example, before I left Albuquerque an ordnance was passed requiring archaeological work for projects over a certain size, I believe it was four acres. The real kicker though is that, unless a local law requires it, state, county, city, etc, or it involves Federal money/Permits, development on private land does not usually involve any sort of archaeological work. Again, a simplification but it works.
True, the federal government owns or manages (usually on behalf of American Indian tribes) a huge amount of land (see image which is a rough guide of were archaeology is required).
US federal land agencies- Public Domain National Atlas of the United States – http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html, “All Federal and Indian Lands”
Yet, the overlap between population, and thus development, and federal land is weak (see image)
As you can see no one lives near where archaeology would be require and there is lots of private land. Of course, development like mines, oil and gas wells, roads, etc. occur in these Federal land areas and drives lots of archaeological work.
Flag and Avoid
Because the density of development in the Western US, where we find most of the Federal land, is less than in the UK, everything is spaced out, lots of archaeology work undertaken is what is called ‘Flag and Avoid’. Sites are flagged up by a survey, usually pedestrian survey aka field walking, and then development is moved around them, easy to do with oil and gas wells, even roads. Thus many expensive and labor intensive excavations are avoided, further reducing work and thus the number of archaeologists needed to undertake it.
This is a bit simplified, the laws are more complex than what I described, but essentially the reason there are so few archaeologists in comparison to other countries is because archaeological work is not required as often- less work means less people employed as archaeologists. Moreover, because of how big the US is it is possible to avoid many expensive excavations by moving developments around sites. If the US had the same heritage laws as the UK, and less flag and avoid, it would probably have 5-10x as many archaeologists as it does now. But we don’t and so the US punches below its weight in terms of archaeological employment.
Doug's Archaeology 
Archaeoguy
July 8, 2014
It’s a shame that archaeology is not required here on private land. How many significant archaeological sites have we lost and continue to lose to housing developments in suburbia where no State or Federal money is involved? No to mention large commercial gravel pit operations that essentially seem to have no environmental oversight at all.
dover1952
July 8, 2014
B.O. Plenty.
1) I sometimes wonder whether we are preserving sites on private land so they will not be destroyed now—but rather we are holding them in reserve so they can be more effectively destroyed at a later time.
2) On these privately owned parcels of land with archaeological sites, I sometimes think about a notion that artifact collectors often bring up here in the United States when a site on private land is about to meet the bulldozer. Basically, it is an art appreciation perspective rather than an archaeological perspective. It goes something like this:
“Well hell!!! That site is going to undergo extensive grading to depth in just two weeks. The professional archaeologists say their hands are tied because no federal funding, licensing, or permitting is associated with the project, and they have no spare funds—so the bulldozers will just have to take it. If no one else is going to lift a finger, I don’t understand why we can’t just go in there with our shovels and picks and do “Artifact Rescue.” We could make a sweet deal with the owner. When the artifacts sell, he gets half the money and the person who rescued the artifact gets the other half of the money—but more importantly—the artifact has been saved so people can study it and appreciate it. It might not be real archaeology, but it sure as hell is a lot better than having the whole damn thing destroyed in a manner where everything is lost completely, totally, and finally.”
Calm down “Conflict Antiquities” guy. I know the problems with that statement and all of its negative permutations. I am not saying that I approve of it. I am simply saying that this perspective is out there in the artifact collector community here in the United States.
The thing that brought all of the above to mind was a huge and very well-known Mississippian Period archaeological site in Madison, Tennessee, that was rather thoroughly destroyed by heavy equipment excavation and grading in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Construction of a big box discount store took a huge portion of the site with, to the best of my knowledge, no professional excavations. Another huge chunk of the site was destroyed by the City of Nashville when it decided to construct a large clover-leaf highway intersection. The rest lies under a huge military cemetery and a similarly huge private cemetery, basically pock-marked to death with dense graves.
When the earthmoving for the highway intersection had been underway for several days, I went over one evening to walk the site and see just how much damage was being done (no artifacts were collected). It was some of the worst cultural resource carnage that I had ever seen. It was extensive and enough to take your breath away. As I have often related in the past, doubting that anyone would believe it, I saw whole Mississippian ceramic vessels that had somehow been pulled up from the ground and smashed in place on the ground surface such that a person could travel (if they wished) from one portion of the site to another and avoid contacting one’s feet with the soil simply by stepping from one pile of sherds to another. It would be hard to imagine what I actually saw that summer evening. Pick a big archaeological site in the UK and imagine hectare upon hectare of it under the bulldozer blade with no archaeologist able to lift even a finger to record anything in context.
Now, after that description, I know some of you British archaeologists have your mouths wide open with shock right now. However, at varying levels of scope and extent, some version of this destruction happens on privately owned land throughout the United States every day. Yes, there is a lot of artifact looting in the United States, and it does do a lot of damage. However, I think it would be fair to say that at least as much—and probably far more—of such destruction occurs at the hands of private land development companies and other entities that have little or no sympathy for archaeologists or our American past. There are occasional happy exceptions, but I would say they are few and far between on a national scale. And there is a very good cultural reason for this besides just the financial issues. The mantra of the United States of America has always been: We Americans look forward to the future. We are not a nation of the past or present. America is ALL ABOUT THE FUTURE.”
As the Dixie Chicks say: ” Now, airs your trouble.”
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
July 9, 2014
1. Well archaeology is destructive so….
2. Yep, many arrowhead collectors make deals with construction sites to dig in the evenings. It gives them a very fair point but also a warped view (they assume nothing ever happens) about “saving the artifacts. Some UK archaeologists remember back to the 1970s and 1980s to the Rescue Archaeology days. So it wouldn’t shock them too much. In an ironic twist the US have had CRM laws (it the current polluter pays form) for several decades longer than the UK. Till about 25 years ago it was heavily volunteer led. They are aware of the horrors of site wiped out, or at least use to be.
dover1952
July 9, 2014
Yes, archaeology is destructive, but that is not what I meant. I was thinking more in terms of the site on private property that one manages to save from a small convenience store that would have taken 5 percent of the site in 2014. Everyone breathes a sigh of relief. Then in 2022 a huge shopping center takes 100 percent of the site—gone forever. No archaeological work was ever done there. What was the point of a heritage preservation effort on private land if a private developer is free to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and wherever he wants on that land.
Then there is the Tea Party factor. I am a political animal here in the states. More and more, ever so slowly and gradually, I am beginning to see the subject of archaeology creep its way into the view of the Tea Party microscope. I can foresee a day when archaeology will be viewed as just one more element in the “damned leftist plot to destroy America.”
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
July 9, 2014
I know. I was just pulling your leg 🙂 . Aye, especially considering most laws are Federal which in some circles is a synonym for evil. I can see if being dragged into political wars.
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
July 9, 2014
It is probably best to not think about it 😦 😦 😦
diggerjohn99
July 9, 2014
It also has to do with the very patronizing system used in the US for archaeologists. Many field schools require prior field schools to get into their field school, and most students don’t have that kind of money. It’s not the laws, it’s the Old Boy’s Club mentality in archaeology in the US.
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
July 9, 2014
In terms of getting job yes. In terms of number of jobs probably not. There are way more people wanting archaeology jobs then there are jobs. What field schools require prior field schools?
Tom Wheaton
July 9, 2014
The federal preservation laws apply to three main categories of projects, those on federal land, those using federal funds, and perhaps the most important, those requiring federal permits from the Corps of Engineers, FERC, etc., etc.
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
July 9, 2014
ah, how could I forget? Cell Tower work. Thanks Tom. Will add that bit.
Charlie Burton
August 11, 2014
8/11/14 Texas
worse is the greed involved. Here in San Marcos, TX there is a large acreage being developed for apartments. No law pertaining to this private development for protection of the cultural resources. The lot is known for many sites due to being along the San Marcos river and a drainage.
A local tow truck company has contracted the builders to haul by dumptruck the trailings from the construction site to their property so they can mechanically sift the dirt for artifacts and then sale them. Horrible! And no law to stop this. NOT LOL, but CRYING!
Charlie B.