Thursday 21 March 2013

Renewed Focus on UK Metal Detecting: Alternative Resposibility

Alternative responsibilities seem to operate in the narrow world of UK metal detecting. We are told that the reason why there is a shortfall in reporting of artefact hunted artefacts is that some oikish farmers hate archaeologists as much as oikish metal detectorists and forbid the latter from contacting archaeologists with their finds to responsibly report them and allow them to be recorded before they disappear in the shadow-world of ephemeral personal collections. Surely the only possible approach to this is clear for a truly responsible artefact hunter. If a farmer says "you can come on my land and hoik out artefacts but I will not let you report them responsibly" the responsible detectorist says, thank you kind sir for your time, and goes elsewhere to find amenable conditions to practice his hobby responsibly. Anything else is surely nothing less than wholly irresponsible.

Vignette: Personal responsibility

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

If you study the Responsibility Code closely it implies responsible detecting involves reporting but it's a bit of a dogs dinner (where's Clause 9 here?
A product, no doubt, of a process of "negotiation" with those who aren't all that committed to reporting.

As for farmers being anti-archaeologists, it's funny, you tend to hear that from those artefact hunters you'd expect to hear it from. Maybe educated farmers are a bit picky about who they allow on their land?

Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.