PAS Records.

[garybrun]

I have been told that a Mr P Barford has access to the PAS records.
if true...why is this so for a non practising archaeologist??
Also this will definitely lead to mistrust [:I]

I will amend my post if it is found to be untrue.

[Steve-B]

I didnt realise they were restricted to just archaeologists, I thought they were available for any academic with a proven need to access the information for valid study.

www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)

[garybrun]

Now pray what valid study would Paul have??

[Steve-B]

Obviously the obvious one, but even if we dont agree, it would be seen as valid by others, dont think there is a lot anyone can do about it.

I dont think it would lead to mistrust at all, quite the opposite in my case, as much as I disagree with barford, I would be more inclined to support an agency that played fair to one and all whatever their particular angle is.

It isnt the stifling of information that will put paid to the likes of Barford, rather cooperation with real archaeologists that are open minded enough to understand and work with metal detectorists and that are in a position that matters.

Stop recording with the PAS and you can tick number one off of his list of aims.





www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)

[garybrun]

It isnt the stifling of information that will put paid to the likes of Barford, rather cooperation with real archaeologists that are open minded enough to understand and work with metal detectorists and that are in a position that matters.

I agree with that.

[BAJR Host]

phew....

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[garybrun]

Paul only has access to what the general public has access too.
Thats a releif... so scrub this topic.

[Steve-B]

No need to scrub it, i think it is interesting to discuss who could or should have access to not only PAS information but that of the HER etc..

www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)

[drpeterwardle]

Paul is clearly a practising archaeologist by virtue of publication record a quick goggle search produces the following for example.

Peter

See

http://aarg.univie.ac.at/worldwide/ww.html

The development of Aerial Archaeology in Poland by Paul Barford.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN POLAND - AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
P.M. Barford


http://www.muzarp.poznan.pl/archweb/archweb_eng/barf1.htm
RESCUE ARCHAEOLOGY:

COMPROMISE OR OPPORTUNITY?

Paul Barford




RESCUE ARCHAEOLOGY:

COMPROMISE OR OPPORTUNITY

[BAJR Host]

both from 1998 ... so I suppose not that long ago... I fear though that he is not an currently practicing UK archaeologist - and has not been for many years - though I could be wrong.

What Steve interstingly touches on is the aspect of who can access records, and why..what how...

I wonder if I could get access if I gave myself a fake name, fake email and a fake research agenda... I could be anyone...

Hmmmmmm.... shall we go secret squirrel to help strengthen the security?



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[garybrun]

quote:Hmmmmmm.... shall we go secret squirrel to help strengthen the security?
You got to be nuts to want to so a thing like that. :D

[historic building]

Sorry but why should Paul not have access to data which is paid for out of public money. He has probably undertaken more research on this topic than anyone short of the PAS themselves. Just as he is not supportive of the project why should he be excluded from access to this data?

[garybrun]

Thats a question you should ask the PAs not us??

[KevH]

Although qualified academics have access to PAS records (and so it should be), can the same academics gain reasonable access to UKDFD for means of research, and would they have access to any sensible recording information, or is UKDFD just an over glamourized picture gallery trying to legitimise detectorists who feel that "their" sites are under threat.

[Dean]

Hi KevH. UKDFD is set up differently to PAS in that the individual recorder always retains control over the finer findspot info they have submitted. This itself invites the otherwise non recorder (for whatever their reasons) to make a record of their finds. Most information is freely (and easily) browsable but access restricted details are available at request to the information holder. This way any possible abuse of sensitive information by third parties is avoided. Recorders are contactable by private message.

[BAJR Host]

Hi KevH.. I have to confess that I find the UKDFD easy to use and one that I prefer for finds identification... I don't think its fair to call it an "over glamourized picture gallery trying to legitimise detectorists who feel that "their" sites are under threat" - as I know of FLOs who use it too...

I would guess that if you had a legitimate reason to interrogate the data you could ask... do you know of any 'qualified academics' (i guess I come into the catagory of non qualified academic) who have used PAS data? and what do they do with it...

Dean has shown that contact is both possible and open... I take it you don't agree with it?

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[KevH]

I'm not doubting its ease of use, or in fact its usefulness. I just doubt the availability of information for those who require it for research.
For example, if someone wanted to get accurate distribution data for Roman finds for GIS mapping a county, using UKDFD they would have to ask every individual user personally.
Would persons actually recording things with UKDFD be prepared to provide 10 digit NGR details to the PAS/HER/SMR if requested. (If s, why don't they just record with the PAS?).
Do the HER/SMR/PAS have free access to the data, no.
I still to this day have a question about just how valid UKDFD is, it doesn't offer the people who need the data most, the ability to use it.

[BAJR Host]

valid questions,
I have often stated that Parish Data is as good as No location at all .. BUT... is in reality meaningless... My own parish stretches from hill, through moorland, farmland and on to the coastal plain... so the object location could read... "Anywhere"

I realise the trouble with accessing locational data... but lets loko at a way at ensuring minimum 6fig is collected... even the PAS has on average ony 25% 10 fig grid ref...

but this is something to talk about...



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Dean]

quote:Originally posted by KevH


Would persons actually recording things with UKDFD be prepared to provide 10 digit NGR details to the PAS/HER/SMR if requested. (If s, why don't they just record with the PAS?).
Do the HER/SMR/PAS have free access to the data, no.
I still to this day have a question about just how valid UKDFD is, it doesn't offer the people who need the data most, the ability to use it.


Some of what you say Kev is quite valid, but I don't believe the key objectives of setting up UKDFD were soley that of satisfying archaeologists requirements, albeit in the main. Unlike PAS and the way it uses information, it also caters for the interests and concerns of the very people that supply the vast majority of information. As you said, this can have its drawbacks archaeologically, but obviously there would be nothing to gain by creating a cloned PAS database with just a different name. In doing things slightly different, thousands of objects have now been recorded which would have never been if it had not existed. I know there are a smaller percentage of finds on DFD that are recorded with the PAS also, but some detectorists like to use UKDFD as well, as it is very easy to find what they have recorded.
I believe thought was also given to make it easier to research artefacts, and of course good coin detail and precise identification to be of use to numismatists.

[Steve-B]

Personally I cant see any comparison between the UKDFD and the PAS facilities, I wouldnt have thought the amount of data on the UKDFD was enough to cause any significamt concerns to heritage professionals.

I do share the concerns of KevH though in respoect of finds data, as a recorder with the PAS I always give the highest reference I am able, otherwise what is the point of recording?

If the finder is only willing to record to a parish level, is it really worth the effort, I think not.

As recording detectorist I can see a use for the UKDFD site for finds identification, but without more accurate and transferable data I cant see it fulfilling any other function.

Dean I have to say that suggesting that someone contacts the finder for fuller find spot information is really a cop out and not a practical answer, but if the intention of the UKDFD is not to be for serious academic use then I guess this isnt an issue.





www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)

[Dean]

I guess its not an issue then lol. Seriously, although I'm no longer a staff member there I do believe UKDFD is for very serious academic use. As concerns suggest though, archaeologists do seem lower on the list of priorities for studying the past.
Hmm, obviously I've forgotton this doesn't directly concern me nowadays so perhaps I should leave it! :)

[Steven]

Hi All
UKDFD and PAS are not really comparable are they? One is a self financing website started by individuals to suit a particular purpose associated with the metal detecting hobby, while the other is a publicly funded scheme with paid professionals employed by public bodies (i.e. councils) which was set up to record archaeologically finds from members of the public.

I don't criticise UKDFD because it doesn't have public funding. I criticise PAS because of the problems inherent within having a scheme which replicates work already taking place in many counties, pulls money away from other heritage budgets and is seriously flawed in that the information it gathers is not suitable for such purposes as archaeological development control (which after all was the original stated purpose of setting up SMRs).

I am still confused about why people are not happy to supply full grid references for finds and in the end this is what most of these discussions comes down to.

Steven