Saturday, 3 March 2018

Responsible-Otherwise UK Detectorist: "I wuld Record Th' 'Istry but..."

Some Facebook tekkie-talk from December 2017:

David Shelley
We've been detecting for 20+ years on our Stater hoard field. Farmer has now gone to HLS agreement & has a clause written in specifically that NO detecting allowed again on the hoard field!
Henri Eighth
What about the field next door[?]
David Shelley
Allowable detecting providing everything is recorded with PAS. Already done them and nothing but cartridges lol
John Maloney
Its very unusual for a field to be added in to HLS purely on detecting finds without anything else such as features or buildings. Does the same HLS agreement stop him ploughing etc? As for the recording aspect...... I have never seen a time frame mentioned.....if you know what I mean.
Vignette: What 'being responsible' means...


Anonymous said...

Yes I think I know what Mr Maloney means. He is famous for talking responsible talk. Even on this very organ Paul: "Our club ethos is that finds have a purpose and belong to everyone to be recorded, shared and contribute to the bigger picture."

Hougenai said...

The links don't work, they have been removed. You have to wonder what these people are afraid of?

Paul Barford said...

... being found out?

J C Maloney said...

Hi both,
Unlike the legislation contained within the Treasure Act 1996 there are no specified time frames for the finder ....they agree to follow the CoP and record their finds. Link & relative paragraph below.
Page 62,
"Any metal detecting that Agreement Holders allow on Agreement Land should be undertaken in accordance with best practice laid down in the current Code of Practicefor Responsible Metal Detecting in England and Wales at:, and all finds must be reported to the Portable Antiquities Scheme."

It is perfectly clear what you can & can not do, all within the realms of stewardship, and doesn`t preclude the hobby from the entire holding. See below:
"On all other Agreement Land, Agreement Holders must ensure that metal detecting does not conflict with the requirements of their agreement, in particular where proposed metal detecting may affect their ability to meet option prescriptions. For example, options supporting ground-nesting birds, priority habitats, or rare arable plants are incompatible with ground disturbance, and such activities may cause a breach of agreement and result in the application of recoveries, withholding future payments, penalties and interest payments – see section 7.3."



Paul Barford said...

Hmm, but it was not the lack of time-frame that we were concerned about, but your comment "if you know what I mean", because I think we all do.

You can say what you like to draw attention away from that candid remark, but it still stands as testimony to an attitude of entitlement.

And the fact that the 'Code of Practice...' does not contain the words 'without delay' is just another indication that the PAS are not doing the job they should.

J C Maloney said...

The wording is, sadly, ambiguous hence the "know what I mean".
If a finder e-mails their FLO with a list of finds, that could be interpreted as reporting and is therefore compliant with the schemes.
The language of such things should be clear and not open to anyones interpretation.
"Finds must be recorded to a 10 figure NGR within XX days to ensure compliance" would be more practical & enforceable.
However as a meagre "hoiker" what do I know about such things?

Paul Barford said...

I disagree, in your "know what I mean" there is no room for ambiguity.

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