Archaeology has historically been problematic from the point-of-view of Tribal Nations. Even though more collaborative approaches have been adopted by some in academia, and statutes and regulatory procedures enacted in the area cultural resource management (CRM), very few advances have been made that improve method and practice that assuage the ongoing concerns of Native People, including the disposition of ancestral belongings in respectful and culturally appropriate ways, and set the stage for deeper and more cooperative relationships.

A Phase II Archaeological Assessment at Fort Totten in Queens, NY, provided the setting for collaborative fieldwork by HDR, Inc. and stakeholders including the Tribal Historic Preservation Office of the Stockbridge-Munsee Community (SMC), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the 99th Readiness Division. At the request of our SMC tribal partners, we implemented a “no-collection methodology” in the Phase II archaeological survey at an archaeological site with significant Middle Woodland, Contact, and Post Contact-period components. The no-collection methodology involved:

In-depth pre-field planning along with dynamic in-field problem solving allowed HDR archaeologists to be prepared for the scope of work while also addressing unforeseen challenges at a particularly complex site. Our SMC Tribal partner, USACE point of contact, our contact at the 99th Readiness Division, and our on-base facilities coordinator were all consulted in the pre-field and during field operations. Through consistent coordination and holistic methods, archaeologists at HDR were able to fully document and virtually curate an assemblage of Pre-Contact, Contact, and Post-Contact period materials while also returning SMC ancestral belongings to their original proveniences. In doing so, archaeologists were able to respect and center the concerns and preferences of our SMC tribal partner while also operating within a CRM environment that adhered to a specific timeframe and budget.

As we look towards the future of CRM, there is a need for greater cultural sensitivity as well as a looming curation crisis. Fieldwork at Fort Totten provides precedence for those interested in employing no-collection methodologies within a CRM context. In summarizing our field methodologies, we also discuss successes and points for improvement. We hope that the fieldwork HDR completed can provide a framework for future no-collection methodologies, elucidate the challenges of no-collection fieldwork, and foster conversations about collaborative archaeology and innovative field methodologies in the 21st century.

The Indigenous Resources Collaborative (IRC), originally called the Four Grandmothers Indigenous Resources Collaborative, was founded in 2023 as a 501(c)(3) non-profit consisting of both Native and non-Native museum and education professionals dedicated to the mission of increasing understanding and awareness of Native people in New England, always with an emphasis on continued and contemporary Indigenous presence. The IRC and its members work with institutions (museums, universities, educators), to present Indigenous perspectives and knowledge as the foundation for teaching and interpretation. In addition, the IRC curates a vast archive of documents, films, oral histories, artifacts and material culture, Native art and basketry, maps, educational materials, photographs, etc., with the purpose of making these materials available to others who share the goals of properly relating Native history, correcting misconceptions and challenging stereotypes, particularly in southern New England, through exhibits, workshops, lectures and curricula. In using the term “collaborative,” the IRC wants to emphasize that this work requires the efforts of both Native and non-Native people to preserve the history and knowledge of Native people for future generations, and to counter and correct past and current representations of Indigenous history and culture which have been omitted from existing educational curricula, and/or perpetuate stereotypes, misinformation, and misconceptions.

The strength of archaeology comes from its multidisciplinary applications and approaches to conducting research. While there is no shortage of collaboration between fields within professional and academic spheres, avocational archaeologists are often disregarded or distrusted within these circles. Through conducting interviews with current avocational archaeologists and analyzing their collections in archival institutions, we can understand the roles that avocationalists play in the larger discipline of archaeology. This paper centers avocational archaeologists in the greater Adams County area in Pennsylvania. Through this research it is my hope that those in the academic and professional realms should reflect on our own privileges in our communities as well as our methods and attitudes towards avocational participants, learning from them and developing sustainable and equal ways to encourage partnership and cooperation between all archaeologists. It is only through this collaboration that we can engage with the public in ways that are interesting, accessible, and that encourage others to get involved in archaeology as we understand it today.

The purpose of this project is to understand how osteology is taught and discussed in many contexts, as well as the solution for many issues. This project will discuss topics like paleopathology, racial analysis, and use examples of teaching collections such as the Mutter Museum(Philadelphia) and interviews with professors from undergraduate classroom spaces. This information will create recommendations for the bioarchaeology and osteology fields about describing the experience of individuals whose remains are being studied. The data collection for this project comes from an intensive literature review, a visit to the museum in question, and an interview process with some staff at the museum and various universities. Also important to this study is research on Cognitive Bias(CB) or the unintentional influence from prior experiences and pre-existing knowledge, which can exist for every person and scenario. Standard methodology in bioarchaeology is often subjective, and there is normal human variation in thoughts while completing work, allowing for CB to potentially have a significant effect on our research conclusions. This research topic was created after the consistent finding that in the academia of this field, researchers and professors may frequently hold unethical practices in laboratories and collections of remains.