American archaeology currently sits at an important crossroad. For decades Cultural Resource Management has amassed an enormous corpus of data that has largely remained in grey literature and State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) databases. The role of these data for research-based academic archaeology has traditionally been confined to regional specialists. However, recent methodological developments in using large radiocarbon datasets as paleodemographic proxies highlight the importance of data that cut across regions. The role of paleodemography in interdisciplinary research on human-environmental interaction emphasizes the importance of new geographic scales of analysis. This new role of archaeological data requires precise spatial data that challenges heritage management and the protection of archaeological sites. In the current issue of Advances in Archaeological Practice we seek to start a national dialogue on the prospects and challenges of spatial data in open access archaeological databases. How can we ensure the continued protection of archaeological sites from looting when the contemporary research landscape requires spatial data of a certain quality?

We initiate this dialogue through an example of the use of geo-referenced radiocarbon date time series to reconstruct prehistoric human population growth within the context of paleoclimate models. For the past five years, and with National Science Foundation funding, we have developed an archaeological radiocarbon database for the US; eventually it will be curated in the Canadian Archaeological Radiocarbon Database. Section 9 of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 and SAA Ethical Principles 1 and 6 require us to limit the spatial precision of radiocarbon dates to the level of county centroids. Our paper shows the problems of using such low resolution data for research on human demography and paleoclimate change.

So, what should we do? Fortunately, the SAA has recently developed a Task Force of Sharing Public Outcomes of CRM, chaired by Joshua Wells (Indiana University, South Bend). This task force includes the multiple tribal, federal, and academic stakeholders required to truly come to a fair and equitable solution to the problem (ER is a member of this Task Force). This task force solicited responses for advice from various other Task Forces’ at the 2019 SAAs, and subsequently prepared a report that is currently being reviewed by the SAA Board of Directors. Awaiting these outcomes, we can only suggest a few actions on the use of spatial data for open access national archaeological datasets.

First, open access spatial data requires a conversation that considers the aims and responsibilities of all stakeholders. These conversations must find compromises, or progress of the profession will stall, strapped by policies developed in a very different time and context. We must work together to adapt our national policies to present challenges and prospects.

Second, state authorities can require databases to accept responsibility for the misuse of information extracted from their databases. We advise memoranda of understanding (MOUs) be developed between SHPOs, tribal authorities, and databases on the misuse of data, and that SHPOs require databases to develop vetting and reporting procedures for database access and use.

Third, agreements must be made between SHPOs, tribal agencies, and databases to intentionally blur data that is openly accessible. Researchers wanting to access spatial data will need to justify their requested resolution of spatial data, which will need to be approved in accordance with the established MOU.

American archaeology is entering unchartered professional waters that will require open communication and compromises across all stakeholders. Legislation and policies must adapt with the times by considering the growing movement toward Open Science approaches. Our paper details how archaeological data has moved away from a disciplinary and regionally-focused silo toward more interdisciplinary and inter-regional contexts. Now is the time that all American archaeologists speak up and enter the discussion on how we best move forward and continue our shared duty of protecting and studying the archaeological record.