Plundering our national treasure: Inside Out on trail of the South's illegal treasure hunters - oldgirl - 18th November 2009
:face-angel: Of course I'm always perfect and never take anything anyone says out of context.... where's that stirring smiley when I need it.....
(here you are... :face-stir: edit... BAJR Host)
I've said on the old forum (as Oldgirl) that I'm still to be convinced about the positive and negative aspects (note - I didn't say rights and wrongs) of this specific method of retreiving information. Just as I am about a number of other survey techniques, both intrusive and non-intrusive. I have come across more instances where people using metal-detectors have not stopped at the topsoil than when they have, but I'll happily admit that I have not had any involvment with PAS and so my sample is biased and probably not statistically valid in size either.
However, to go back to the original point about the TV programme - I'm very glad to hear (above) that the people who use metal detectors responsibly are equally angry about the selfish and destructive acts of a few thieves. Has anything happened as a result of that?
Plundering our national treasure: Inside Out on trail of the South's illegal treasure hunters - PeterM - 18th November 2009
Plough damage is being addressed, to some extent, by agri-environment schemes. Natural England pays out a fairly large sum every year to revert arable use on Scheduled Sites to grassland. Easier when grain prices are low and the site has to be in Higher Level Stewardship. As class consent is for activity in the previous 6 years then, we hope, a lot of these sites will not be ploughed again in the foreseeable future.
Obviously there are a lot of Scheduled Monuments that won't come in to agri-environment schemes, although we can produce "single issue" agreements for SMs if that is the only bit of the holding that is of significant interest.
|