Interview and Transcription by: Laura Crawford, NAPA Vice President
This month our NAPA Vice President, Laura Crawford, sat down with Dave Williams to chat about his role as Nebraska State Archaeologist. Dave talks about his path to becoming an archaeologist, issues facing Nebraska archaeology, tribal collaboration in Nebraska, and more!
Your Path
What Sparked your interest in archaeology?
Growing up, so I grew up in South Dakota, my neighbor was, kind of anything to do with dirt. He was involved in, so he did paleontology, geology, and then was also kind of an avocational archaeologist. And so I was a little kid, like, 6 years old, when we moved to the neighborhood, and he was showing me stuff that he had found, and talking about archaeology, and all that, and I was like, oh, that sounds really cool. And so that kind of got me interested in it.
And then, like, through school, I was always just kind of into history and learning about the past, and in elementary school, we had this after school program, and in Rapid City, where I grew up, was the State Archaeology office in South Dakota. And one of the guys there came over and did an after school program. It was like, I don’t know, three or four sessions, and he told us about archaeology in the past, South Dakota, and brought atlatls and artifacts and stuff, and I was like, wow, that’s super cool.
And just kind of stuck with it ever since. We’d do school projects about, you know, what do you want to be as an adult? And it’s always an archaeologist, and so I just kind of carried through, and, like, it’s just always what I’ve done.
Nebraska-Specific Work
Is there a Nebraska site or project that has been especially meaningful to you?
Oh, yeah. So prior to getting this job, I had never worked in Nebraska, and I probably shouldn’t say that out loud as Nebraska State Archaeologist, but I had worked every state around Nebraska. So it’s been a learning experience. Been over 4 plus years now.
I think the project that’s been most meaningful and impactful is probably the Massacre Canyon project. Tops the list, working with Pawnee Nation and doing the research on, you know, the accounts that have been told about what happened at Massacre Canyon, getting the oral histories that we’ve collected so far from citizens of Pawnee Nation, going out there and doing the survey.
We had the dog team out there searching for alerts where individuals were buried, and there were positive alerts, and that’s like, okay, so the stories are lining up that there was something going on here, and people were buried here.
Finding artifacts that are of the time period — ammunition, metal arrowheads, stuff like that — that are like, okay, this is like a 6 or 8 hour battle over 100 years ago. The likelihood of there being much left isn’t very high, but there is stuff out there, and we can piece together that story.
I guess right next to that would be the work at the Genoa Indian Industrial School, and the efforts we’ve been working on for five years to try and locate the cemetery where the students who attended the school and died while attending were buried. We’ve employed the dog team there again. Geophysics, archival research, talk to folks in the community, talk to tribal members, and, still unsuccessful in locating it, but just that collaboration with all those different groups.
Forty plus tribes had students attend the schools, so we’ve had consultation meetings with a lot of those representatives, and every time we’ve been out there, every time we’ve talked to tribes about the project, they expressed their gratitude that we’re trying to find this missing piece of their history and their families and relatives.
I’m kind of surprised you said Massacre Canyon. I thought for sure Genoa would be at the top of the list, and then you said it, and I’m like, yeah, that makes sense.
Yeah. I think, I mean, obviously it’s very meaningful. It’s impactful. Well, I guess both projects started before I was here. I kind of had a hand in getting them both going, but, I think the more direct collaboration with Pawnee Nation, I think has been helpful in a lot of ways.
With the Genoa cemetery search, it’s definitely a meaningful project. Being out there — we were out there two and a half summers ago — and doing the excavation to try and find the burials, like, it was, we’re doing this.
I think for me, because there’s so many others involved — like folks at the Genoa Museum and the Genoa Digitization Project have done a bulk of the background research — there’s been others who, I feel like the archaeological part of it, I’ve been very involved in. The other pieces of it, less so. So I think for that reason, Massacre Canyon — like, been doing the research, talking with them, meeting with them.
I mean, it’d be like a one A, one B.
The Role
So, you kind of talked about getting into the role of the State Archaeologist and these projects kind of preceding you, but you also took them on. So, related to that, how would you describe the role of the Nebraska State Archaeologist today?
I think I’ve got kind of three, three primary roles, maybe four.
So, my role only exists because of state statute. And that’s a fairly recent statute, 2005, I believe, that says the State Archaeology office will exist for this purpose, and there will be a State Archaeologist. There was a de facto State Archaeologist prior to that time, and our office has been the central clearing house for Nebraska archaeology, but officially, 2005.
So within that, I’m responsible for Nebraska’s archaeological data. Collections, site documentation, reports, the digital data, maps, photos, anything associated — like managing, maintaining, making that available to researchers, and so on.
There’s a second piece in that about working on state lands and state funded projects. So making sure that when a state agency is planning to do work somewhere in the state, if it’s fully state funded, they’re supposed to be reaching out and making sure that they aren’t going to be impacting archaeological sites.
So one of the things since I’ve been in this role is trying to refine that process and make agencies aware that, yes, this is something you have to be doing. There’s been a little more success recently, and we’re working with SHPO to refine that process a little bit more. But it’s not without its challenges.
Then there’s our unmarked burials law. So whenever human remains are inadvertently discovered — through construction, erosion, agricultural activity, people cleaning out a relative’s garage or basement or something, and they find human remains — after law enforcement, we’re the next office called.
And we help with the identification, making sure it’s human or non human. If recovery is necessary — if it’s remains eroding out of a cut bank — we’ll do a recovery. If it’s in a spot where it can be stabilized, we’ll try to leave in place.
But recovery and notification — letting tribes or other stakeholders know that we’ve found remains — and then returning them if we do recovery or have a transfer from somebody’s personal collection or other museums, sometimes who don’t fall under NAGPRA because they’ve never received federal funding, but they want to return remains that were donated in the past. You know, transfer those to us so that we can do that NAGPRA work.
And so there’s that responsibility.
And then outreach, as I would say the 4th — spreading the word. Working with school groups. Responding to emails and phone calls about found artifacts or we’ve got a site on our property or somebody told me there’s this thing out here, could you look into it?
School groups that want us to come in and give a presentation. Or recently over the last 8 months or so, there’s this international Lego club, FIRST Lego League. The theme this year is “Unearthed,” which is archaeology theme, so we’ve been getting a lot of calls and emails about providing guidance, assistance, or comment on projects that these groups are doing.
So explaining what archaeology is, why we do what we do, the importance of it. We’re not pot hunters. We’re not treasure hunters. Like there’s legal ramifications for doing archaeology and not doing archaeology right.
Publications, presentations at conferences, other events like that. So it’s a pretty wide ranging role.
Which I think is one of the things I really like about it, is I’m always doing something different. There’s the administrative side of things and tweaking and coming up with and refining processes and procedures. Going out and talking about archaeology. Getting to go to projects like Massacre Canyon and Genoa. Getting in the field. Helping with survey, lab work. Kind of anything it takes to be an archaeologist, I get to do.
That’s a lot.
Yeah. A lot of hats.
Surprises and Time
What surprised you the most when you stepped into this role?
Um… Oh, that’s a good question.
I don’t know.
I mean, it was a lot to learn because, like I said, I hadn’t worked in Nebraska. So getting familiar with how things were organized here, the state of the collections, the site files, the GIS data, the staff. I mean, I hadn’t worked with any of the staff. I was a totally new person coming in and now, you know, running things.
I don’t know if there were any surprises. I think one benefit I had was overlapping about a month with Rob Bozell, the previous State Archaeologist, and he was gracious enough to come up with a whole list of topics and things like, hey, you want to be aware of this? And here’s something I’ve been working on that I didn’t get done, but, you know, you’ll be able to take that on.
So in some cases, this type of role, you come in and it’s just like, here, here’s all this stuff, go and do it. And I think if that had been the case, there would have been a lot of surprises.
But I was fortunate enough to have that overlap period, and most of the things that I’ve encountered in the past 4 years, he kind of prepared me for that expectation.
I guess maybe just the number of hats. The outreach, the administrative stuff, the NAGPRA and the burial stuff — like all those pieces. They weren’t unexpected, but it’s like, oh yeah, okay, this, there are a lot of components to this.
Related to that — what part of the job takes up more time than people might expect?
It really depends on the day or the project. My tendency is usually deep dive. So like if I get a request about a burial site that’s supposedly reported up in the Sandhills, I’ll probably spend more time diving into those sorts of things and trying to find any scrap of evidence that we’ve documented or it’s been reported in the past.
I guess that’s really situational. And it only takes a lot of time because I make it take a lot of time to be thorough.
The day-to-day stuff — I’d say the procedural process type stuff.
For example, right now, working with SHPO on an agreement with the Department of Administrative Services, who manages state construction projects and state buildings.
The state statute says — well, there’s multiple statutes — one says if a state agency is doing a project, an undertaking, they’re funding it, they need to reach out to our office and get it cleared. Another statute says if any state-owned building is being worked on, SHPO needs to be contacted.
They’ve had the same issue we have — they aren’t always notified. So we’re coming up with an agreement that basically says DAS, when they receive project requests, they’re going to verify that that agency has reached out to us and SHPO.
So in coming up with that agreement, researching other similar agreements, making lists of exclusionary activities — mowing lawns doesn’t require review. Digging a fence post is probably exempt. Digging a water line? They need to contact us.
So looking into what other states have, what other state laws exist, learning about what other agencies manage lands that we need to consider.
One example — we’re working with the Bureau of Reclamation and Pawnee Nation on a project that involves irrigation districts. So there’s a whole set of statutes related to Nebraska irrigation districts. Now I’ve got to dive into those and figure out what is the legal authority of those, and are they a state agency? Are they not?
That’s probably what takes up a lot of my time — diving into legalese.
Yeah, that sounds complicated.
Yeah, not something I really ever expected.
I guess that maybe that’s a surprising thing. The number of times I’ve had to go to the statutes and look up specific information. And it’s not something they teach you in grad school. You just learn by doing.
Trial by fire.
Another piece I overlooked — the statewide cemetery registry. By statute it exists, but it just says the historical society will manage this registry. It fell to us over the last few years.
The number of times I’ve had to go into cemetery statutes and pull information for people asking about what it takes to start a cemetery association, or we had a cemetery association, it’s been defunct for decades, what do we do now? Or I want to bury family members on my personal land, what do I have to do?
Those aren’t questions I knew the answer to. I still kind of don’t. But I can give guidance now because of having to read those statutes and talk to folks.
Those statutes are dense.
Yeah. And the vocabulary is confusing.
They’re tough.
And sometimes they seem contradictory. So I always preface responses with: I’m not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. You should consult a lawyer. But my interpretation is X, Y, Z.
Professional Practice
What are the most pressing archaeological issues facing Nebraska right now?
Well, I think really everywhere right now — funding.
Archaeology isn’t very expensive in the whole scheme of pipelines or highways, but it gets overlooked as an afterthought, even though there are laws that say it has to be done.
When a contractor finds out three quarters of the way through planning that they need an archaeologist, and they want to start groundwork next week, it’s usually not enough time. We have to tell them: you’ve got to do background research, maybe survey, maybe excavation — and you’re going to have to pay for that.
And there’s often a balk at that. “Whoa, wait, what?”
To do a really good faith effort takes more funding.
Potential changes to Section 106 at the federal level could impact how archaeology is done — not just in Nebraska, but everywhere.
Nebraska is only about 4% public land. We can’t just go out and do archaeology. We need permission. There’s a lot of unexplored space. We’ve got almost 12,000 recorded sites — compared to some states, that’s not many. There are undoubtedly thousands more.
The Sandhills are a huge chunk of the state, and it’s very difficult to find sites unless they’re exposed in blowouts or cut banks.
So to really understand Nebraska archaeology — the data we have is great — but there’s so much more to learn.
We’re doing good work. Other archaeologists in Nebraska are doing good work. But we’re confined to project corridors.
If we had more grants — SHPO money is limited — we could explore bigger chunks, like full river basin surveys again, like the Blue River or Elkhorn.
But that’s funding and time.
And I think one positive thing is we’re not just doing the work and shelving it. People are writing about sites, presenting about them.
What kind of trends are you seeing in terms of review and consultation in Nebraska?
Nothing’s really changed yet. Projects come through, we review them, prepare a report, submit it.
Our role is making a recommendation. Then it goes to the federal agency, SHPO, tribes, etc., for concurrence.
What’s coming out of DC is discussion about streamlining Section 106. Redefining “area of potential effects” — APE.
Right now we consider haul routes, visual impacts, auditory impacts, borrow sites, waste sites, stockpile sites — not just the footprint.
If APE is redefined smaller, that reduces review effort.
There’s a long-standing argument that archaeologists hold up progress. I don’t think that’s the case. When you dive into federal hearing examples, delays were usually due to other permitting issues.
If exempt project types expand — say shoulder widening inside existing right-of-way — those projects might go away from review.
Funding is another issue. If Historic Preservation Fund money is reduced, or transportation money reduced, that impacts archaeology.
At the state level, I’d like to clarify language in our statutes. Right now it says agencies must contact us when there is “potential to impact archaeological resources.” But who decides that?
Adding language requiring review by a qualified archaeologist would help.
Also, tribal consultation is required federally, but not at the state level. Adding advisory language encouraging consultation would be meaningful.
Tribal Collaboration
What does meaningful collaboration with tribal nations look like here in Nebraska?
Thankfully, relationships here are positive.
Rob Bozell spent a lot of time building those relationships — visiting tribes, working with them on NAGPRA, research projects, excavations, training.
Coming into the role, there was already a positive vibe. That’s not always the case elsewhere.
For me, it’s regular communication — emails, phone calls, in-person meetings — not just when there’s an issue. Check-ins.
Most of the folks I work with feel like they can pick up the phone or text without it being a big formal thing.
Inviting tribes into projects early — not generating content and then asking for approval. That doesn’t go anywhere, especially without compensation.
For Massacre Canyon, funding became available and Rob called Pawnee Nation and asked, “What do you want to do?” And they said Massacre Canyon. So we started planning.
That’s different from starting a project and then figuring out who to involve.
It doesn’t have to be tumultuous.
There are centuries of reasons why relationships can be difficult. But deliberate communication matters.
Public Archaeology
You’re really into public archaeology. How does that factor into the mission of the office?
We collect, preserve, and interpret Nebraska archaeology.
Taxpayer dollars fund us. There needs to be something going back to them.
Programming, volunteer digs, school visits, explaining what archaeology is and isn’t.
If you find an artifact — on private land, do what you want. On state or federal land, don’t touch it.
Take a photo. Take a GPS point. Share it.
We shouldn’t be hoarding data. Obviously we can’t share site locations or burial information, but the work we’re doing, how we’re doing it — we can share that.
Public-friendly publications. Presentations. Engaging avocational archaeologists and students.
We can’t do archaeology without public support.
And in a time when funding is questioned, we need to explain why archaeology matters — adaptation to climate change, conflict, food shortages.
It’s not treasure hunting. There’s so much more to it.
The Future
What are your priorities or hopes for Nebraska Archaeology over the next five years?
Clarifying statutes so agencies contact us. Avoiding a situation where an agency plows through a burial or important site because they didn’t notify us.
We don’t want that bad press. If I didn’t know about it, I couldn’t be involved.
More broadly — expanding public archaeology.
Long-term pipe dream: visit every county in Nebraska on a rotation. Not just Lincoln, Omaha, Scottsbluff. Every county.
Arthur County is the only county without a documented archaeological site. They’re out there.
Go to county museums, historical societies. Have a boilerplate presentation, then tailor the last part to that county’s history.
Invite people to bring artifacts. Document them.
We’re not in the business of taking stuff unless it’s a burial.
Nebraska Archaeology 