15th November 2009, 07:19 PM
I have recieved this from EH... so it really is up to a solid pilot project and write it all down. Here were all the objections.. which is quite handy. Most of tham are easy to solve.
So with a small group of say 5-10 with one archaeologist and a FLO and do it on 3 sites. Measure the time taken, the finds collected, the state of the finds, the type of site...etc.. and whether the site sees a decline in Nighthawking (we could use the Oxford data) and then we have a real template and costs.
I, like you know it can be done... so the gauntlet is down..
Quote:The practicalities of the sheer number of SAMs, the definition of ?surface? in relation to intact buried archaeological deposits, the costs of processing, identifying, conserving, storing and publishing of all the finds that would be recovered, the implication of coordinating and policing such a programme effectively, the impact of access, legal ownership and the Treasure Act and the implications for non-Scheduled sites also being attacked, all combine to convince us that your suggestion is simply unworkable.
So with a small group of say 5-10 with one archaeologist and a FLO and do it on 3 sites. Measure the time taken, the finds collected, the state of the finds, the type of site...etc.. and whether the site sees a decline in Nighthawking (we could use the Oxford data) and then we have a real template and costs.
I, like you know it can be done... so the gauntlet is down..
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Thomas Rainborough 1647