Wednesday 10 December 2014

Focus on UK Metal Detecting: Carrying on Despoiling for Own Gratification

In a thread called "Re: Detecting and its contribution to Archaeology" a rather superficial mutual back-slap prompted by a saccharine blog-post by PAS's Michael Lewis, we find a somewhat variant point of view. The whole justification of reporting and recording all this stuff hs been to claim it is used in planning and heritage management. In a situation where this actually happened (one of few cases actually documented), the 'finder' is less than happy. In fact he's stopped recording finds with the PAS because of it. Here's Heritage Action's take on it, with which I wholeheartedly agree.
“Edmundy” carries on detecting despite the landowners telling him not to report his finds.
Someone (PAS) should have told him not to detect if he can’t report what he finds and the same someone (PAS) should have told the landowners not to allow people to detect if they don’t want the finds reported. Someone else (Edmundy) is beyond the pale for not walking away of his own accord. Thus, another bit of everyone’s archaeological record goes west thanks to a quango that neglects its duty, landowners who are consequently kept uninformed and a detectorist who must surely know what’s the right thing to do but prefers to do the opposite! Bonkers….. Britain.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Well, the defence being put forward is that you and I are "trolls" and we are avoiding the fact that recording "is a voluntary choice"! In other words we should remember that anti-social behaviour is legal, innit!

The tragedy of the voluntary system is that it was based on the hope that detectorists are capable of understanding that selfishness should be abandoned voluntarily. A large number clearly aren't.

Let them ask PAS if they think their behaviour is OK instead of reassuring each other that it is.

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