Archaeology Professor Pleads Guilty to Charge of Taking Folsom and Clovis Artifacts

[Maedevil]

Local briefs Feb. 26 2011 - The Santa Fe New Mexican

A least the guy was charged... although he should have been nailed with more, given his professional status.

[joshuaream]

I wonder how they caught him, and what his intent was...

If his intent was to put them in his personal collection or on eBay that's a no-no, but if he got caught because they were cataloged in the museum collection or he notified another archaeologist of the find then that's another issue.

Sure, it's wrong to pick up stuff, but I'd rather it get picked up and reported by an archie or a collector than get picked up by a tourist who's going to forget where he got it.

[uniface]

I'm probably dense, but I don't see where this is anything but an ambitious prosecutor out to put a scalp on his pole.

[Maedevil]

I wondered the same thing, but literally cannot find anything else on the case. I do find it interesting that the Department at Loyola hasn't issued a statement - most university departments find having their Chair charged with a federal offense worthy of comment.

[Maedevil]

The article got the name wrong too... Dr. Daniel Amick - he's certainly not an unknown - I'd really like to know the full story on this situation.

[Mojave]

Yeah he is obviously very well known.
Just goes to show how it is not that unusual. Sorry if I sound accusational, but how many archaeologists NEVER picked up an arrowhead??
American archaeologists either acknowledge being collectors earlier in life, or they are liars. Obviously there are exceptions but I bet a majority would fall into one of those two categories.

[Mojave]

“entered a guilty plea to one misdemeanor count of violating the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, says a news release from U.S. Attorney for the New Mexico District, Kenneth Gonzales. It says Amick was ordered to serve one year of probation.”

I am curious.
I thought the ARPA made it illegal to remove surface archaeological resources from gov’t land but there is no penalty (Carter Clause). So what is the probation for? It didn’t say anything about NAGPRA (graves) or interstate commerce or….
Do you have any other insights or information? Did he actually steal from a sanctioned excavation? That would be highly immoral in addition to illegal. Many here will argue that picking up an occasional arrowhead from the surface isn’t that big of a deal. But taking paleo points from an actual excavation???
Or is this screwed up journalism?

[joshuaream]

Originally Posted by Mojave

Yeah he is obviously very well known.

Yes, and he's worked quite a bit with the material he picked up... It would be interesting to know if he was on personal vacation and just stumbled across isolated finds, or on "company time" research for some project, or even if it was a known site.

In the absence of information, I'll assume he was doing the right thing and feel sorry for him.

My guess is not too many archaeologists would leave an interesting relic (or six or seven) on the ground, especially if it's something they've actively studied over the years. If Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley were sightseeing together in Yellowstone National Park, and they came across a paleo relic I'm sure they'd pick it up with the best intentions in the world. I can't see Stanford considering for a second that he was stealing, in fact he'd probably take it to keep it from being stolen.

[Mojave]

Originally Posted by joshuaream

Yes, and he's worked quite a bit with the material he picked up... It would be interesting to know if he was on personal vacation and just stumbled across isolated finds, or on "company time" research for some project, or even if it was a known site.

In the absence of information, I'll assume he was doing the right thing and feel sorry for him.

My guess is not too many archaeologists would leave an interesting relic (or six or seven) on the ground, especially if it's something they've actively studied over the years. If Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley were sightseeing together in Yellowstone National Park, and they came across a paleo relic I'm sure they'd pick it up with the best intentions in the world. I can't see Stanford considering for a second that we was stealing, in fact he'd probably take it to keep it from being stolen.

That was why I asked. If it is an ARPA violation like the article said, AND there was a penalty, it could not have been a surface find. It MUST have been dug up...

[seco]

I agree with other folks who have posted on this curious thing. Dan Amick is
well known for his research, most of it published in monographs and refereed
journals. If, in 2007, he and 2 colleagues (did they get off?) picked up
12 lithics from a surface site on Federal land, my assumption would be that
they felt they were too important to be left to the vagaries of nature and tourists. Plus, I would assume that he would have immediately gone to the
Fed agency (BLM? NPS?),told them of the materials, and offered them to them for curation -- after, of course, he studied and photo'ed them.
This is not an uncommon event...to come across something unexpected
and have to deal with it within the framework of reality. Sometimes, you
get an Antiquities Permit after the fact, or some agency bureacrat says
"you should not have done that! Bad archaeologist!" and that is it -- provided the artifacts are headed to curation and not being sold.

Several scenarios....perhaps he pissed someone off at one of the Fed agencies (NPS springs to mind), or ...... well, hell, I can't think of
any reason a professional archaeologist who was cooperative would
ever go to trial. If he had stolen these from a lab or museum, or from
a private collector, that would be one thing. Or if he had been digging
away in a shelter or open site, that would be another issue. But picking
up 12 artifacts off the surface and generate this much heat???

A puzzlement...

TRH