Preservation of Archaeological Sites— de Laguna 53 



organization of the armed forces it may be desirable to have 

 responsibility transferred from the Secretary of War to the 

 Secretary of Defence, since this would provide for legal pro- 

 tection of sites within Army, Navy, and Air Force reservations. 

 However, the legal picture will again be changed if Alaska 

 becomes a state. Presumably the National Forests of south- 

 eastern and southwestern Alaska would still remain under the 

 control of the Forest Service (Agriculture), and the few National 

 Monuments be under the care of the Park Service (Interior). 

 As we know, the few native reservations are threatened by the 

 present statehood bills, but even were they preserved, the bulk 

 of the Territory, and precisely those areas where archaeological 

 sites are in most serious jeopardy, would pass from Federal juris- 

 diction to that of the new State. In that event, state legislation 

 would have to be devised to care for what had been public lands. 



However, we know that the Antiquities Act has not been en- 

 forced, and may be unenforceable. It is even unknown to the 

 bulk of residents in and visitors to the Territory. Paradoxically, 

 it is only professional archaeologists who are likely to fall afoul 

 of the law, through some inadvertent failure to conform to the 

 detailed regulations, since it is only those who apply for per- 

 mits who come to the attention of the agents of the government. 

 To patrol and protect Alaska's sites against the depredations 

 of unauthorized diggers, would require a far larger personnel 

 than the Federal agencies now responsible can supply, and might 

 demand a greater indifference to popular local feeling than we 

 can expect of law enforcement officers who need public support 

 for the effective performance of more urgent duties. 



Actually it is only the site which is still unknown that is com- 

 pletely safe. The dense forests of southeastern and parts of 

 central and southwestern Alaska, inaccessibility, or poverty of 

 spectacular material are still the best protection for archaeologi- 

 cal remains. On the whole we need not be too concerned with 

 the destruction of sites in the panhandle and interior of Alaska, 

 except possibly in the vicinity of the larger towns. But it would 

 certainly do no harm if all members of the Forest, and Fish and 

 Wildlife Services and the Geological Survey were reminded to 



