16th November 2009, 03:01 PM
The interesting conundrum is this.
FACT SAMs protect a site with legal status
FACT Nighthwks by definition are criminals so therefore this legal status does not put them off (see several high profile cases where even when caught, they get off with it)
FACT The items they take will never be recovered - so are lost forever
FACT Plough damage and chemical fertilisers are destroying and will continue to destroy both the site and the artefacts
So... What is being protected...? The do nothing scenario results in teh slow inexorable depletion of the very thing that is protected - Where the do something scenario leads to increased responsibility to items that would otherwise be lost anyway. So do we say... sod it... it is better to lose these items... OR sod it, lets recover these while we can, add to the assemblages, and remove the threat of nighthawks digging deep and damaging untouched archaeology. Remove the temptation ? Add to the data. But who pays?
It's circular at the moment, however, as you know Steven (you cheeky monkey) - going too far is what I love to do. Push the boundaries and see what happens. 8D
FACT SAMs protect a site with legal status
FACT Nighthwks by definition are criminals so therefore this legal status does not put them off (see several high profile cases where even when caught, they get off with it)
FACT The items they take will never be recovered - so are lost forever
FACT Plough damage and chemical fertilisers are destroying and will continue to destroy both the site and the artefacts
So... What is being protected...? The do nothing scenario results in teh slow inexorable depletion of the very thing that is protected - Where the do something scenario leads to increased responsibility to items that would otherwise be lost anyway. So do we say... sod it... it is better to lose these items... OR sod it, lets recover these while we can, add to the assemblages, and remove the threat of nighthawks digging deep and damaging untouched archaeology. Remove the temptation ? Add to the data. But who pays?
It's circular at the moment, however, as you know Steven (you cheeky monkey) - going too far is what I love to do. Push the boundaries and see what happens. 8D
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