15th April 2013, 11:22 AM
well obviously there are exceptions and i'm glad to see you both reiterate yours. but it is undeniable that the product, and therefore presumably the methods, of a vasy amount of archaeological mitigation submitted as part of the planning process is piss poor and does nothing to further archaeological research or theory. from where i sit it appears that quality is being left to a decreasing number of individuals whilst the majority chase profit margins and market share and require the workforce to cut corners and ignore the bigger picture.
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers