Referring to well-worn argument for turning a blind eye to archaeological destruction through Collection-Driven Exploitation I commented (17/11/2014 at 14:37) on a grass-roots heritage group's blogThis ‘better out than in’ may apply to a decayed tooth or inflamed appendix, it does not apply however to conservation, neither rhinos or hoiking from archaeological sites.This is a perfectly reasonable point and links the concerns for the conservation of the historical environment with the broader issue of conservation of threatened resourcs in general. Ssomebody, no doubt an unschooled metal detector user, hiding behind the notable screen name of "The scally (sic) handed heratage (sic) grabber" apparently is incapable of seeing it like that and replies (20/11/2014 at 22:45) [spelling as in original]
Talking of teeth Mr Barford i would really enjoy knocking your’s out.
TAKE A GOOD LOOK at this behaviour, for these are precisely the sort of people the PAS wants to grab more and more millions of public quid to make into the "partners" of the British Museum, archaeological heritage professionals and to whom they want us all to entrust the exploitation of the archaeological record. Take a good look and decide what you think about that as a "policy".
Vignette: A detectorist's idea of having a good time.
No comments:
Post a Comment