Final answer:
The process of determining what should be preserved at archaeological sites involves a balance of restoration and conservation efforts, consideration of legal and ethical implications, and input from various stakeholders to respect cultural significance and maintain educational value.
Step-by-step explanation:
Decision Making in Archaeological Site Preservation
Deciding what needs saving when entire archaeological sites cannot be saved is a complex process involving various considerations. This includes determining the specific point in a site's history that should be represented, accommodating future changes in the interpretation of the site, and assessing the impact of visitor interaction. Restoration vs. conservation debates are at the heart of these decisions. Restoration involves adding modern materials to ancient remains to preserve them, while conservation focuses on protecting sites as they are. Considerations also extend to legal and ethical issues, as some restorations may be irreversible or culturally insensitive.
Moreover, the decision-making process should involve the consultation of a variety of stakeholders, including city planners, museum curators, government leaders, and the public. UNESCO's perspective that World Heritage sites belong to all humanity highlights a universal duty to preserve our common heritage. However, issues at sites like Mali's historical mosques and the debate around the Elgin Marbles' future show the challenges and controversies that often accompany these decisions.
Preservation efforts at places like Cascadia Cave illustrate the dangers of both archaeologist and public attention. Illegal activities, such as the removal of archaeological materials, highlight the need for stringent protection and careful consideration of how to balance access with preservation. The overarching aim is to preserve the integrity of the site, prevent cultural loss, and maintain its educational value for future generations.