17th September 2013, 12:16 PM
Wow I go away to site for....less than a day.... and this discussion explodes!
Silly, silly, silly Unit. When will you learn. The world does not consist of just what you see in your narrow view? There are bigger worlds, There are more things in heaven and earth, (Horatio),
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
On large projects, especially in the pre-planning stage, good archaeological companies/consultants produce DBA's and/or contribute to the project environment statement (ES) including HER/NMR searches, aerial photography searches (or google earth - hooray), Lidar inspection, site walkover, fieldwalking, geophysical survey and trial-trenching to test the previous info. From these and varying forms of predictive modelling, recommendations are made, which are often followed and/or adapted. These recommendations can include site avoidance, the best form of mitigation.
I have been involved in several projects where the client avoided important archaeology either by route change, construction methodology change or even abandoning building in that area entirely. Surely this is the best result, so that the remains can be excavated at a later stage under a research dig rather than rescue dig?
But given your 'screw over the client' policy, I'm not surprised you don't get the kind of clients we do. }
Silly, silly, silly Unit. When will you learn. The world does not consist of just what you see in your narrow view? There are bigger worlds, There are more things in heaven and earth, (Horatio),
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
On large projects, especially in the pre-planning stage, good archaeological companies/consultants produce DBA's and/or contribute to the project environment statement (ES) including HER/NMR searches, aerial photography searches (or google earth - hooray), Lidar inspection, site walkover, fieldwalking, geophysical survey and trial-trenching to test the previous info. From these and varying forms of predictive modelling, recommendations are made, which are often followed and/or adapted. These recommendations can include site avoidance, the best form of mitigation.
I have been involved in several projects where the client avoided important archaeology either by route change, construction methodology change or even abandoning building in that area entirely. Surely this is the best result, so that the remains can be excavated at a later stage under a research dig rather than rescue dig?
But given your 'screw over the client' policy, I'm not surprised you don't get the kind of clients we do. }