Roberts et al., and megafaunal extinctions.

[Judith Field]

Thanks to Tim Barrows for putting this out on AusArch (oops I meant this
for the AQUALIST).  The paper that was
published in the 6th June 2001 issue of Science by Roberts et al has
attracted some comment in the press over the weekend.  However, there are
two crucial and completely independent issues that we would raise about the
paper: professional ethics and facts about Cuddie Springs.

Firstly the weekend Australian (9th June The Nation, Page 3) referred to
our anger at the fact that the Science paper published OSL dating data for
the Cuddie Springs site without our knowledge.  The samples for OSL dating
were taken from our excavation in 1994 and we were notified by Roberts of
the dates in late March with no reference to any impending publication. We
first heard of this paper containing the dates after it had been published
(the paper had been submitted to Science in mid February).  All of the
excavations (within the last 10 years) at that site have been done by us,
under permits issued to us.  One can argue about who actually owns the
dates, but the OSL dating of the Cuddie Springs site was undertaken clearly
on the understanding that it was a collaborative project.  Neither we nor
Roberts et al. could have done it independently so we DID expect to be
informed of the dates and co-publish the Cuddie Springs dates when they
were complete.  After that, the dates would have been in the public domain
and available to anybody to use and interpret as they saw fit.  To simply
find these important dates slotted into a larger paper is infuriating to us
as the chief archaeologists working on the site and we believe such
publication compromises professional ethics.  At best it breaches common
academic courtesy.

Secondly, the Science article dismisses Cuddie springs as a site which
could be "disturbed".  Let us hit this "rumour" on the head here and now.
As we said above, we are the archaeologists who directed careful excavation
and analysis of the site.  Our data and reports are the only reliable
information that is available for the site and demonstrates that Cuddie
Springs is not disturbed, specifically in Archaeological Levels 1-4 nor in
the pre-human deposits.  The evidence includes:
1. a complete pollen record showing trends which are consistent with other
pollen records for the same period (see Dodson et al., 1993; Furby, 1995;
Field et al., in press)
2. the geomorphology indicates the site is an ephemeral freshwater lake
providing a low energy depositional environment for the archaeology, faunal
and environmental records (see Field et al., in press).  There are 2
distinct stratigraphic units within the human/megafauna levels (Field &
Dodson, 1999)
3. a set of dates for the site (now more than 15 different independent
samples using 14C, TL and OSL) are consistent across the stratigraphy.  The
site is securely dated.  Note that the Roberts et al results show the dates
in stratigraphic sequence.
4. The archaeology shows clear and distinct changes through the sequence
consistent with both the pollen and geomorphological phases (See Furby,
1995; Field & Dodson, 1999)
5. The faunal assemblages also show distinct differences between
stratigraphic units and archaeological levels providing further evidence
for sequential horizons of occupation (see Furby, 1995 for detail).  In the
lower horizon, Archaeological Level 1 there are some elements of Genyornis
in anatomical order ie a 'separated articulation'.
6. Numerous grinding stones first appear in levels dated to around 30,000
BP (Archaeological Level 2) when the pollen record shows a clear shift in
local environmental conditions. (Fullagar & Field, 1997; Field & Fullagar,
1998).
7. The whole human/megafauna deposit is sealed between two old land
surfaces; the upper is a 'deflation pavement' formed during a period of
peak aridity around the LGM and the lower is a concreted beach lag deposit.
The archaeology and fauna is found in fine-grained deposits consistent with
a low energy depositional environment. (Field & Dodson, 1999, Field et al.,
in press)

The fact that Cuddie Springs does not fit the Roberts et al hypothesis
doesn't mean that the site can simply be dismissed -but rather suggests
their hypothesis is wrong, the dating method (single grain OSL) is
producing incorrect results or that the method is inappropriate for this
type of site.  

If we are to continue the debate on megafaunal extinctions, let us base our
arguments on rigorous data and consideration of all the facts.  Cuddie
Springs is an important Pleistocene archaeological site with megafauna and
artefacts dated to at least 35K bp.  Any theories about extinctions must
accommodate this.

Judith Field and Richard Fullagar

For those not able to access the literature here is the current list of
publications on Cuddie Springs:
Dodson, J.R., Fullagar, R., Furby, J.H., Jones, R. & Prosser, I.  1993
Humans and megafauna in an Late Pleistocene environment from Cuddie
Springs, north western New South Wales.  Archaeology in Oceania, 28: 94-99.
Furby, J.H., Fullagar, R., Dodson, J. & Prosser, I.  1993 The Cuddie
Springs Bone Bed Revisited, 1991. in M. Spriggs & M. Smith (eds), Sahul in
Review.  ANU, Canberra, pp. 204-210.
Furby, J.H. 1995. Megafauna under the Microscope: Archaeology and
Palaeoenvironment at Cuddie Springs.  Unpublished PhD thesis,  School of
Geography, UNSW.
Fullagar, R. & Field, J. 1997. Pleistocene seed grinding implements from
the Australian arid zone.  Antiquity 71, 300-307. 
Field. J. 1998. Recent Research at Cuddie Springs.  Riversleigh Notes. 38,
4-8.
Field, J. & Boles, W. 1998. Genyornis newtoni and Dromaius novaehollandiae
at 30,000 b.p. from Cuddie Springs, southeastern Australia. Alcheringa 22,
177-188.
Field, J. & Fullagar, R. 1998.  Grinding and pounding stones from Cuddie
Springs and Jinmium.  In R. Fullagar (ed.) A Closer Look: Recent Australian
Studies of Stone Tools. Sydney University Archaeological Methods Series 6.
ISBN 1 86451 365 9.
Field, J. & Dodson, J. 1999. Late Pleistocene megafauna and human
occupation at Cuddie Springs, southeastern Australia. Proceedings of the
Prehistoric Society 65, 275-301.
Field, J. 1999.  The Role of Taphonomy in the Identification of Site
Function at Cuddie Springs.  In M.-J. Mountain (ed.) Taphonomy '95.
Proceedings of the 1995 Taphonomy Symposium.  ANU Canberra. Pp. 51-54.
Field, J., Barker, J., Barker, R., Coffey, E., Coffey, L., Crawford, E.,
Darcy, L., Fields, E., Lord, G., Steadman, B. & Colley, S. 2000.  'Coming
Back'-Aborigines and Archaeologists at Cuddie Springs. Public Archaeology,
1:35-48.
Field, J.  2000 The Pleistocene megafaunal locality of Cuddie Springs.
Riversleigh Notes.45, 11-12.
Field, J., Dodson, J. & Prosser, I. (2001) A vegetation history from the
Australian semi-arid zone.  Quaternary Science Reviews (in press)


****************************
Dr. Judith Field, 
U2000 Research Fellow
Archaeology, A14
University of Sydney, 2006
N.S.W., Australia
Phone: 612 9351 7412
FAX:   612 9351 5712
Email: J.Field at chem.usyd.edu.au