English Heritage's guidance on "responding to heritagecrime in progress" is not a lot of use when you see some blokes walking up and down with shadowy metal-detector-like tools on an archaeological site in the middle of a field at dusk. They might be nighthawks, or they might be there with a letter of permission. That's in Bonkers Britain, outside it there is often far less ambiguity.
22 comments:
If I'm honest Paul I would say that anyone who is walking around fields on a night with a metal detector is quite possibly being dodgy and nighthawking. Unless of course its on the beach which I myself have done in darkness to be able to catch the tide right. I would never be found in a field after dark though as why would you want to do something you can do in the daytime and in the light to instead choose to do it in darkness. I suppose there could be the odd case where the person works strange shifts so the only time they can do the hobby with permission is on a night but I would urge anybody who sees suspicious activity especially late at night to report it to the land owner and possibly the police.
Well, we have both seen blokes explaining why they are out at night legitimately on a "permission". The point being one cannot assume they are there illicitly.
Obviously before you phone the police, you should try and ascertain whether they are there legitimately, but the English Heritage - bless them - advice is not to approach them (so how else can you find out who they are and what they're doing there?) , so a bit of a cleft stick really.
Some guys might want to go out when the missus is in a bit of a mood for example... Or they cant sleep as they've problems at work or whatever... Or they want to link their metal detecting with other hobbies, such as watching bats and other nocturnal critters.
Anyone seen metal detecting on a "known" heritage site at any time of the day is suspect and this should be reported to the local police.
Yes I agree some people do things at different times for whatever reasons.
As for managing the problem of nighthawking I think it's difficult if not impossible. If the general public see someone detecting in a field chances are they won't think anything of it. But as a detectorist I have visited many local farms trying to ascertain permission to search their land. So generallyi know which farms allow detecting and which do not and which already have people with permission to detect. If I see someone detecting suspiciously or I know the farmer does not allow it I will not hesitate to contact him to let him know.
Us detectorists stick together but we have no problem in taking action against someone we believe to be nighthawking or the likes as this sort of behavior leads to a dim view of us by the public.
Back on topic I struggle to think if ways to regulate the problem without a blanket ban on detecting but even that won't stop nighthawking as atthe end of the day it's just theft it's like someone walking into a shop picking something up and walking off without paying for it and unfortunately just like anything in life you will get good people and bad people.
Possibly one way to try stem the problem would be to make it compulsory to have a signed permission form with you when detecting or maybe as well a compulsory id card that is incorporated with the fid insurance card and should be on show at all times or at least shown when asked.
Sorry for any mistakes in this text. I'm using my phone for this and it's playing up
I would also like to add that the current laws make a mockery of catching nighthawkers. I believe as it stands trespass is not a criminal offence and is a civil matter. Which in my mind means the nighthawkers can walk around where ever they please and no one can do a thing about it untill they get caught digging holes which I then believe can be classed as crimal damage and if they have a detector at hand possibly classed as going equipt
"Anyone seen metal detecting on a "known" heritage site
So that is about everyone who does "research" to find out where people have found stuff in the past, and those that use those CD databases of archaeological sites sold to "history hunters". Is that what you meant?
Nobody here is proposing a "blanket ban on metal detecting".
Hi Paul...
A known heritage site is one that carries some form of designation that is put in place to safeguard its condition.
Well, no, a known site is the Roman villa down the road from my parents' house, known since the nineteenth century. It is not scheduled, has no SSSI status and has been totally trashed by metal detectorists. That trashing did not happen in the nineteenth century, not the first seven decades of the twentieth, it happened now because it is a known site.
Now tell me, David Scroggins is walking his dog on a footpath, knows there's a Roman villa in that field, sees metal detectorists on the known site, but I bet David Scroggins does not know the legal status of that site, nor which parts of that farm are scheduled, and which not. So how does he "know" any crime is being committed when there is no way to differentiate legal from illegal artefact hunting in the flesh? What English heritage/ PAS outreach is there to help Mr Scroggins ? What can everybody do?
He would need to speak to the landowner or local police to determine whether the permission to metal detect on that site has been granted...or not. If it has been granted then the metal detecting activities are not illegal.
But is it ethical to target known sites?
I didn't think this was a thread about ethics...??? I thought it was about what to do if you suspect that someone is detecting illegally.
I believe the answer to that question Paul is a matter of opinion obviously you and the people with the same mindset as you will think that it is not ethical. However on the other hand we as detectorists may not see it as being unethical and see it as having a higher chance of being able to dig up coins and artifacts of a greater historical importance. I know for a fact non of the detectorists I know and associate with would dig on a protected site but I don't think there are many of us who would turn down the opportunity to dig on a site that isn't protected but has had a good amount of history to it
Mr Broom, Ethics, that's the leitmotif of this blog. The talk shifted to artefact hunting on known sites.
Mr Baines "the people with the same mindset as you" are not collectors, they are preservationists and value the archaeological record for more than what collectables for their own personal entertainment and profit they can extract from it.
The problem is that a site once one of your lot has hoiked their way across it no longer has "a good amount of history in it" for anyone else.
In my book, responsible detecting would indeed entail saying 'no' to deliberately trashing known archaeological sites, no matter what the personal gain.
I dont think that "responsible" detecting is "trashing" a site and it can indeed be used to contrbute to the knowledge of the archaeology that exists there, if it is carried out correctly. Im curious...are you suggesting that any field where artefacts have been found should be considered as a "known" site...???
Whose "responsible" (by what standards) and whose "carried out correctly"? I think in the majority of cases what is called "responsible detecting" can be demonstrated to be trashing the archaeological evidence at the sites where it is being done.
We are getting a long way from the original topic of the post. can we focus please? The topic is recognizing illegal artefact hunting.
Sorry Paul. I don't agree. If metal detecting is carried out legally and responsibly and the benefit of making the find can be properly captured and recorded, then I don't see how anyone can say that this is not of value to the historical knowledge of an area. Apologies...I will get back on topic now.!
That you do not see it does not make it not true. Comfortable myth and reality do not always coincide.
How do you feel about a builder like Bovis or such not allowing any metal detecting on it farm land. They don't want anybody to find our heritage before they build and wreck the land.
Their land? About the same as I do about those landowners that do.
What do we have planning departments and archaeologists for?
Post a Comment