+- 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: Metal Detecting Q&A (/showthread.php?tid=52)
Metal Detecting Q&A - Steve-B - 3rd December 2005
Quote:quote:It is very reassuring that there are MD's out there like Steve.
Well believe me, I wasnt always this way and I truly believe that if I can climb out of the trench, look around me, listen and learn (and I am not alone) then there has to be hope for the hobby as a whole.
Mein host should be applauded for the work he does in building bridges, I have seen him on various fora taking flack from both sides as he does this. However tough the going gets he has inspired me to be happy to do half the job he has done....respect.
As I have said earlier, the first step is for the hobby, (some group, or individuals within it) to raise a standard, and at the same create and atmosphere that firmly places any malpractice as being 'socially' unacceptable.
I know there have been calls for licencing of the hobby, I personally do not think that nay external licencing will solve any of the issues, it will just drive metal detecting underground... however I would like to think that the hobby itself could debate a form of internal memebership/licencing... which could then be approved hobby wise and promoted by clubs, magazines etc... I beleive that any project that is created to raise the standard could well be in a position to provide this, I belive that you have an organisation that does similar, the IFA?, something along these lines would be an excellent start.
I have often spoken about self determination for the hobby... I think at times this has either been misconstrued (or I have expliained it badly) to mean non cooperation and a that the hobby should make a partisan stance against archaeologists...this isnt the case.. perhaps I have chosen the wrong phrase, what i do mean by the hobby being self determining, is that it should take responsibility for its own actions and shoulder the responsibility of promoting good practice from within.
There is nothing wrong with taking external inspiration to want to promote better practice but to my mind, blindly and unthinkingly doing as one is told does not demonstrate any level of responsibility, it merely demonstartes that one is capable fo following orders.... conversely, listening to what others say, designing a workable code of practice, following and promoting this for yourself independantly does in fact show a marked sense of responsibility.
Please bear in mind that I speak for myself here, although I am aware that I am not alone in this line of thinking.
Metal Detecting Q&A - kevin wooldridge - 3rd December 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Steve-B
I know there have been calls for licencing of the hobby, I personally do not think that nay external licencing will solve any of the issues, it will just drive metal detecting underground...
There is an alternative to licensing detectorists and that is to licence the site.
I believe this works on the Thames foreshore where the PLA has complete discretion as to whom is allowed to detect. The same could be applied to sensitive sites where a local planning authority or national heritage body could grant or withold permission for detectorists to operate. I believe that archaeologists have in turn a responsibility to reciprocate responsible behaviour by the MD fraternity by creating ways in which detectorists can be integrated into archaeological projects at every level from evaluation through to full excavation and including watching briefs. This could be made a compulsory part of the curatorial brief.
Metal Detecting Q&A - BAJR Host - 3rd December 2005
What a superb thread.... we all have a lot to thank.. people lke Steve, - Venicone is a shining star - and if you want inspired... get along to her site.!
After spending years shouting at each other...all we had to do was talk! And the cooperation that has and is happening is astounding.
Look forward to the results from the MD / Arch colaboration on the A68 project in Midlothian
I hope that a BAJR guide created by Steve (and Venicone... hint hint) will really break new ground... explaining and dispelling some myths.. and also helps more MDs to understand more about archaeological concerns... so instead of grumblin.. we is movin forward!
Another day another WSI?
Metal Detecting Q&A - troll - 3rd December 2005
Have`nt read all this in detail yet-just off fer a wee.....just thought I`d throw this in quickly-metal detectors are illegal in Poland! Back soon.Gaggin.....
Metal Detecting Q&A - archae_logical - 4th December 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
What a superb thread.... we all have a lot to thank.. people lke Steve, - Venicone is a shining star - and if you want inspired... get along to her site.!
After spending years shouting at each other...all we had to do was talk! And the cooperation that has and is happening is astounding.
What a pleasant change to see detectorists and archaeolgists discussing, and listening, to each others points of view :face-approve: , so much better than what takes place elsewhere.
Keep up the good work.
E
Metal Detecting Q&A - Steve-B - 4th December 2005
Hi Kevin
In respect of licencing, I can only refer you back to my earlier opinions on the matter, any kind of external attempt at licencing would either be ignored, or would just drive the hobby underground... unlike the Thames foreshore there is no effective way of policing the whole of the English countryside, for it to be effective it has to be a hobby led incentive relying on its social sensibilities.
I do agree with your ideas on intergrating detectorists with archaeological projects, this is the kind of thing I was referring to when I stated that familiarity will breed change amongst the dettecting community.
I have helped on several archaeological digs and it had a marked effect on my personal opinons of archaeology and archaeologists. This whole concept Kevin, is in my opinion paramount to a better understanding and appreciation of the responsibilities that the detectorist has to his part in conserving the resource.
David, you are right and have been on more than one occasion when advising me
it is better to talk than to shout, as I have stated on Britarch I would be more than happy to help/collaborate on a guide to MDingfor BAJR.Troll, hope you had a thoroughly satisfying one and in response to your mention of detectors being bannded in Poland, I have no first hand information on the situation there.
However, I have talked to Italian detectorists where metal detecting is banned in some states, this has directly led to the hobby being driven underground and to the rape of literally thousands on previously unrecorded archaeological sites where information on finds and the sites has now been lost for ever, not only to the frustration of the archaeologists of that country but to the detectorist as well.
Some of those that still practice the hobby there, still unbelievably attempt to record their finds knowing that thy face may prosecution for doing so. I would hate to think that we would ever go this way within the UK.
archae_logical... I couldnt agree more..
Metal Detecting Q&A - Steve-B - 4th December 2005
[u]Ground Effect</u>
As mentiond in earlier posts, ground mineralisation or Ground Effect has a dramatic influence on the performance of a metal detector.
This is due to the ferrous oxides within the ground matrix being 'read' as a positive signal by the detector.
To combat this effect, metal detectors are divided into three types - Fixed Ground Balance, Manual Ground Balance and Automatic Ground Balance.
[u]Fixed Ground Balance</u>
Fixed ground balance detectors have as the name implies a fixed level of ground exclusion. In the main this is good for most sites where average lvels of mineralisation are present. In situations where higher levels are encountered and the detector becomes unstable, the user can counteract this by adjusting the sensitivity control, but this will however lead to some loss of performance.
Many inexperienced detectorists will complain that their detector is unstable, normally this is because they are trying to operate at too high a level of sensivity for the prevailing ground conditions. The ground will determine the level of sensitivity and performance of the detector,it is simply a matter of listening to what the machine is telling you..it knows best.
[u]Manual Ground Balance</u>
As the name says, the cuicitry on these machines allow forthe operator to manually set the level of ground exclusion based on prevailing mineralisation levels. If set correctly then the operator can achieve optimum levels of performance from the detecor, however a poorly manually balanced machine can easily result in worse performance than one with fixed ground balance.
Manually ground balancing is a simple operation, which wwith exprience can be carried out in a matter of seconds.
Another common mistake on manually ground balanced machines is that the user does not regularly check the balancing. Mineralisation levels can change quite rapidly even over a small area andif the operator does forget to check the balancehe can soon quite easily be running at less than optimum performance.
[u]Automatic Ground Balance</u>
Sometimes referred to as Ground Tracking. On some more sophisticated units, the detectors ground balancing circuitry continually monitors and samples the level of ground mineralisation. This information is read by the detectors on board microprocesor and the ground balance is automatically altered depending on ground conditions to maintain optimum performance without any input from the operator.
Metal Detecting Q&A - the invisible man - 4th December 2005
Call me naive (or Hilda if it really gives you pleasure) but in the grand scheme of things, what is the difference between an archaeologist and a metal detectorist? Archaeologists aren't called trowellists!
To me, a metal detectorist is an archaeologist that specialises in the use of a particular non-intrusive shallow depth technique. Or it be viewed as assisted fieldwalking... They are by definition studying the human past by its material remains. As such, this is an excellent example of an area of fieldwork based research where the amatuer (i.e. non-paid) can make a real and valuable contribution - actually only the amateur can do it, in practice.
So why regard it is an us and them situation, instead of a technique like res and mag etc? OK it's not the same but you get my drift. Why not encourage MD and bring it right INTO the practice of archaeology?
Of course there are nighthawks and unsavoury types, and sellers of antiquities: these have nothing to do with MD or archaeology, they just happen to use the same instrument.
We owe the dead nothing but the truth.
Metal Detecting Q&A - Petethedig - 4th December 2005
Hello Steve!
Evil to him who thinks evil.
Metal Detecting Q&A - Steve-B - 4th December 2005
Hey Pete..
Would appreciate some of your thoughts here mate.