What's the problem of leaving it up to interpretation? We don't know who's right, and we don't know who's wrong. When it comes to puzzling over the existence of a Native American burial ground on the future site of the student athletic center, disagreements run high. But the university is taking the right steps to settle the issue, stifling a potential build up to more trouble down the road.

On one hand, a local historian claims there is something sacred about the location, citing the presence of remains. On the other hand, an independent firm holds there is no evidence to support that claim.

Instead of adopting one view over the other, the university's separate investigation into the issue before the commencement of any construction demonstrates its commitment to search for an objective answer. It's tempting to simply side with the findings that work in their favor, but UC officials' determination to settle the matter under no legal obligation is commendable.

While it's a fairly standard practice to conduct such research before building any massive structure, these archaeological tests illustrate how the university is looking beyond its own interests. Instead of haughtily proceeding without paying attention to outside concerns, others' input is finally being taken into account.

Sampling cores of the area is a meticulous process, but willingness to spend the time to do so may pay off in the end. As we all know from the tree-sit marathon, a year or two is nothing to some activists if they're able to get their way. And the costs of the tests are a small price to pay compared to exorbitant fees that accompany another potential drawn-out court case or protest.

The better-safe-than-sorry approach is always preferred to a brazen charge ahead, and it's a tactic the university should adopt for all future projects.