+- 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: Oops! (/showthread.php?tid=535)
Pages:
1
2
Oops! - Tim - 26th April 2007
http://medarch.blogspot.com/2007/04/digger-blunder-at-site-of-roman-fort.html
"Freedom of ideas is one thing, freedom of the purse is quite another". Edward Harris
Oops! - Steven - 30th April 2007
Hi,
I'd like to see the WSI for this project as I wonder what that said about digging method, most WSI's make it pretty clear how any trenches will be dug.
Steven
Oops! - Tim - 30th April 2007
Interestingly the Unit involved had been bought by a property company. Secondly there was no archaeologist (of the unit, county or EH) on site to monitor the work being done.
"Freedom of ideas is one thing, freedom of the purse is quite another". Edward Harris
Oops! - vulpes - 30th April 2007
Quote:quote:Secondly there was no archaeologist (of the unit, county or EH) on site to monitor the work being done.
Unless you can back up this assertion (the press story doesn't suggest this) I would suggest that it is unfounded and falls oustide the AUP.
Also, I fail to see the relevance of the ownership of NAU - I think NPS property is a wholly council owned enterprise anyway - and is just a vehicle to make the unit better able to tender for work outside Norfolk.
Oops! - BAJR Host - 30th April 2007
Sorry Tim... but Vulpes is kinda right.. Unless you can back up the claim that nobody was on site and this led directly to the 'accident' it would have to be altered. We must be careful... though I also confess as it stands it only teeters on the edge of AUP... asno statement made as yet is accusing either the company or archaeoliogsts of wrong doing.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Oops! - gonetopot - 30th April 2007
But without appearing to be a bit harsh, something must have gone wrong as surely a PO should have been machine watching at the least, ergo they were absent or carried on regardless, unless the developer was progressing without informing the archaeologists (ho hum, where have I heard that before?)in which case the planning authorites should be preparing to throw the book at them!
Oops! - Tim - 30th April 2007
Sorry I was pointing out nobody was machine watching and somebody allowed the machine to start work prior to some monitor being present. If there was a monitor there when it happened even worse!
"Freedom of ideas is one thing, freedom of the purse is quite another". Edward Harris
Oops! - gumbo - 30th April 2007
There was an NAU PO (who was an assistant PO at the time)on site at all times, and the job was monitored by the County Council(NLA, Norfolk Landscape Archaeology)(although not physically during the actual machining event. As far as I know, EH were not actively involved, although presumably there would have been contact over briefs and section 42 stuff etc.
As far as I know, the crux of the matter is that there was a difference of opinion between NLA and NAU over (something like) the phrase 'a machine may be used to take off deposits to the first significant horizon', as stated in the brief, and deposits (other than topsoil) were taken off to get down to negative features. When the monitor, David Gurney (NLA), inspected the site (after the machining) he felt that the machining had already taken off, and therefore destroyed without record, 'significant layers'. This point is still contended by NAU, who supported their on-site member of staff very well.
My take on the sitation (as an informed outsider) is that NAU maybe should have checked in advance on this potential point of interpretation before/during the machining , but also that the wording of the NLA brief could have been clearer, and perhaps the machining should also have been physically monitored by NLA if they knew, and were worried, that important subjective decisions were going to have to be made (I would be interested to hear it this ever does happen on other Scheduled sites).
Finally, for this matter to be brought up by the press a year later seems to be a bit unhelpful and will hopefully not lead to bad feelings between two parties (NLA and NAU) who have to work together with one another on a daily basis.
Hope this is AUP freindly, I have no axe to grind, but just know a couple of people involved.
Oops! - BAJR Host - 30th April 2007
Thats put everything into perspective and makes things clearer ... plus makes me happy that its not happned again... I thought i was suffering groundhog day!
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Oops! - vulpes - 30th April 2007
Thanks Gumbo. As is often the case with the sensationalist press all is perhaps not what it seems, and this apparently wanton destruction of heritage may be a matter of opinion rather than fact. Still it makes a good story.