Cutting, fracturing, flaking, and polishing of bones and other osseous materials may in some instances be interpreted as evidence of former human activity. Such interpretations must avoid confusion with the wide variety of natural processes that alter bones. Reliable criteria are prerequisite to sound inferences based on bone, regardless of whether they have been redeposited or recovered from primary assemblages. Criteria must be defined by means of actualistic studies (neotaphonomy) and experiments that demonstrate causal relationships between patterns of alteration and the processes that produce them. The criteria can be empoyed in the interpretation of fossil bones (paleotaphonomy) on the basis of uniformitarian principles. At the present time, such relationships are relatively well understood in the case of cut marks on bones, and modest progress has been made in investigating fractured and flaked bones. Polished bones are little understood and difficult to interpret.

The annual freezeup and violent breakup of temperate and high-latitude rivers produces unique geomorphic features that can be recognized in ancient sediments. The forces and materials involved in the breakup process could modify entrained bones in ways similar to those attributed to human activity. An intuitive taphonomic model is developed to explain how river ice may affect bones, and to predict the modifications expected. Partial testing of the model by experiments designed to simulate river breakup produced bone modifications such as fractures, flakes, facets, striations, isolated cuts, and polish. The taphonomic effects of river ice must be discounted prior to the interpretation of such features as human in origin.

An unusually severe drought in 1982 led to a temporary die-off of elephants at a natural water source in Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe. Compared to living populations, the age structure of the animals killed by drought is strongly biased toward 2-to 8-year-old animals. However, the fresh carcasses of these young elephants were commingled with weathered remains of adults that had died earlier, creating a mixed skeletal sample whose age structure was much closer to that of living populations. Observations of elephant bones that have accumulated due to natural mortality at water holes might provide analogs for paleoecological interpretations of fossil proboscidean assemblages.

Field investigations of caves along Alaska's Porcupine River document three major mechanisms which modify bone in patterns similar to alterations produced by man: (1) carnivore fracture; (2) rodent gnawing; and (3) rock fall and rubble scarring. A late Wisconsin faunal assemblage composed of Equus sp., Rangifer tarandus, Ovis dalli, Bison sp., proboscidean, numerous small mammal species, birds, and fish is well documented. This faunal assemblage suggests a mosaic environment of grassland-tundra-forest in the immediate vicinity of these caves and implies that the late Wisconsin environment in north-central Alaska may have been characterized by a number of microenvironments and colder, dryer, steppe conditions. Taphonomic data which have historically been interpreted to support human occupation of eastern Beringia during the Pleistocene are critically examined and the context of these discoveries (not the specimens themselves) provides the test essential to document the antiquity of man in North America prior to 12,000 yr ago.

Camelops was a major faunal element in late Wisconsin biotic communities over much of North America. Interpretations of possible human association with Camelops are often based on poorly evaluated evidence. Ideal standards for acceptable evidence are compared here to the actual evidence that has been advanced. Of 25 fossil assemblages examined, 2 might be examples only of geological contemporaneity of humans and Camelops; 2 might indicate behavioral association of humans and Camelops bones; and 2 might indicate actual human utilization of Camelops (killing and/or butchering). Camelops bones interpreted as artifacts are similar to modern specimens affected by noncultural processes.

Broken large mammal fossil bones in eastern Beringia have been used to argue for a middle-Wisconsin, or earlier, time of human entry into North America, It has been inferred that these controversial Pleistocene bones are artifacts because (1) they are similar to those found in archaeological sites and (2) they can be reproduced in the laboratory by replication. However, fractured, flaked, polished, faceted, cut, and scratched bones similar to the purportedly human artifacts described from Beringia are known to be produced by natural processes. New experimental data demonstrate that identifications of Pleistocene bone artifacts on the basis of differential staining and fresh breakage are suspect. Physical processes, such as the violent forces of river ice breakups in the north, and bone crushing by mammalian scavengers produce similar pseudo-artifacts. Additionally, the middle-Wisconsin dates associated with some of the finished tools, and human and dog bones from Beringia are open to question. The lack of credible dates on these artifacts raises doubt about the model of human colonization of Beringia, developed in the 1960s, which proposed an interstadial colonization of the New World.