+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Metal Detecting Q&A (/showthread.php?tid=52)
Metal Detecting Q&A - Hugh - 15th December 2005
I was really only jokeing about seeding as I know that to fool a decent discriminator you would have to use a massive amount, preferably of bronze so that it gives the same signal as the artifacts. If you had that much money at your disposal then you could pay for an excavation
Metal Detecting Q&A - leg11aug - 15th December 2005
Quote
"Many many sites are under grave threat (from numerous causes) to sit back and watch them disappear is not an option... a strategy yes.... a wait and see... not really."
I thought that was called "Preservation in Situ"...
You're right of course sir, all I'm saying is the only way to ensure a site is safe from looters is to clean it out 100% which means complete excavation.
Incidentally.The theoretical scenario I referred to is based on a real series of events as described to me by an employee of the PAS.
I'm not Anti-Detector, personally I think any damage they do pales into nothingness compared to that inflicted by modern agriculture, and they're dead useful on site.
...answers back to host...gulps nervously..
Throwing in the trowel.
Metal Detecting Q&A - mercenary - 15th December 2005
On the topic of detectorists having scrap boxes. Would it not be better if ferrous or other "un-interesting" finds were immediately put back in the hole from which they came? I suspect that would save a huge percentage of the finds inadvertantly removed from a site that may be of interest to archaeology but not the detectorist. It would be a very small cultural change.
Apologies if that is in the codes of conduct, which I've not read carefully.[:I]
Metal Detecting Q&A - leg11aug - 15th December 2005
Problem is they like to re-visit sites and don't want to be re-detecting old finds.
Throwing in the trowel.
Metal Detecting Q&A - john1504 - 15th December 2005
From the point raised by leg11aug and Hugh, I would determine that there is (with all due respect) a lack of understanding of the causes of the problem.
If an area is being 'hit' by nighthawks (s**thawks would have been a much more appropriate name) then there is a high probability that there are metal artefacts being found there. Whether the site has burials or not, is scheduled or not, is of no consequence to these people. All they want are items they can sell. They don't care about the archaeology, or the ethics, or anything else (including the Law or the farmer) other than the 'bling' factor.
Farmers, in general, are aware of these people, and are more annoyed at the damage they cause to the crops than what is taken out of the ground. The incidents sometimes get reported, and county archaeologists informed, especially if scheduled sites are affected. But, as with everything else involving Heritage, there is no way of enforcing any restrictions on these people. Consider this... What would happen if a farmer and county archaeologist actually caught some of these people in the act? What law or punishment would be used in such a case? There is no deterent that I know of to prevent these people doing what they do. They are not considered 'Detectorists' by us, in much the same way as grave robbers are considered 'Archaeologists'.
So what solutions do we have available? Leg11aug has named the only 3 that I can think of. First may be financially restrictive, and the third impractical because of the 'threat'. Which leaves the second option. Deny the thieves any prospect of loot, and they won't bother with the site. It won't be worth their time.
Hosty mentioned a working depth of 10". This is true for most machines. But some of you may be shocked to know that a couple of the newer Detectors can reach depths of 15" and there is rumour of a new detector that can detect metal to a depth of a metre. I say rumour because it boils down to sales pitch. GaryBrun or Steve-B could give you more information on these machines.
If a complete excavation is financially restrictive, would the removal of all metal, which could be recorded using a GPS by 'qualified' people be of practical use? After all, it is the removal of these items from the site, without adequate recording, that has caused most of the arguments between detectorists and archaeologists.
Mercenary. An interesting point, but the reason the 'scrap' is removed from the area is at the request of the farmer. I believe (but don't know for sure) the corroding metal effects the pH of the soil, so the farmers are happy to see it removed. Sometimes the items are kept by the farmer because they came from one of his tractors...
. Leg11aug is spot on about detectorists revisiting 'productive' sites. But the finding of reburied scrap metal is seen more in the light of bad-manners or laziness on the part of the original finder and is subsequently removed.I hope I've answered some of the points raised to the satisfaction of the questioner, and that the way in which we conduct searches makes more sense to some people.
Metal Detecting Q&A - Hugh - 16th December 2005
I do understand that nighthawkers are difficult, if not practically impossible, to stop. However until someone thinks of something better the only way to deal with them would be to monitor any persistantly plundered site at the times you think they visit. It would then be down to the farmer to take action, unless the site is scheduled, and it would be best to go straight to the farmer while they are out there.
Without the problem of nighthawkers there will be fewer archaeologists shouting "Plunderers" everytime they meet a metaldetectorist (hopefully). I'm not niaeve enough to think anything will change though
, so we'd best approach it from another direction and I should really get up of my backside and talk to some local detectorists
Metal Detecting Q&A - BAJR Host - 16th December 2005
Cue hideous sucking noise as Curatorail Backside is levered off comfy seat. sschllllllllllllllllllooooooooooooooooooooop....pop
But you are right... we must get up and meet and talk and discuss and cooperate... not just with detectorists, but everyone else that is involved or has interest in the past..
Another day another WSI?
Metal Detecting Q&A - Petethedig - 16th December 2005
Being a detectorist myself, I would advocate a structured removal of all surface finds on any site that showed illegal activity on it. In fact I have suggested this on a couple of occasions to my local FLO.
This was met with little or no significant response, making me feel like he didn't care. Tough I thought, this new Roman town found just North of Bristol will be systematically raped of any finds and who cares! I'd rather be a part of a solution than the problem, but this attitude is useless when offered up it seems.
Lets face it the very best way to stop these thieves is to remove the items they seek with 12 fig NGR'S. Problem solved, articles in the local museum complete with a map of the surface lens layer!
Evil to him who thinks evil.
Metal Detecting Q&A - Steve-B - 16th December 2005
Quote:quote:Hosty mentioned a working depth of 10". This is true for most machines. But some of you may be shocked to know that a couple of the newer Detectors can reach depths of 15" and there is rumour of a new detector that can detect metal to a depth of a metre. I say rumour because it boils down to sales pitch. GaryBrun or Steve-B could give you more information on these machines.
Not really John, because you are talking absolute bollocks, that displays a distinct lack of understanding of even the basics of the hobby or the technology invloved... but in usual fashion you, on behalf of your masters will undermine any real laison that individuals attemp.
Enjoy...
Metal Detecting Q&A - sniper - 16th December 2005
can I just say, be calm and remember the AUP
++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++