+- 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: Thornborough "debate" (/showthread.php?tid=2060)
Thornborough "debate" - Venutius - 12th December 2005
Hi Merc,
To be honest I entirely agree with you and it is not just the northern sites. The bottom line seems to be, unless people shout about a site, it gets forgotten until its too late. And people will not shout if nobody informs them.
What happened at Thornborough is that the position regarding the quarrying was laid out by an archaeologist at an open meeting three years ago. All of the resulting "fuss" has been been as a result of that stimulus.
Since EH are government and not supposed to be campaigning, and since most archaeologists steer well clear of campaigns that could damage future employment prospects, who is going to inform local people of the heritage that is being lost?
The Milfield example is typical is it not? We allow our press to think the large scale destruction of sites is to be celebrated and we thank the developers for the "opportunity". EH will even help fund it.
All because the planning system that we have has so many loopholes and opportunties for a myriad of interpretation that mean local authorities find it almost imposible to protect unscheduled sites from development, many do not even try.
Save the Thornborough Henge Complex - http://www.timewatch.org
Thornborough "debate" - Venutius - 12th December 2005
Yes, I think Ladybridge should be scheduled - it is of national importance and it is under threat. I know that this will not stop the ploughing and I know it may well be closing the barn door after the horse has bolted but yes, if my understanding of EH's approach to scheduling is correct then this should happen, certainly for that area where the Neolithic settlement is known to extend.
Save the Thornborough Henge Complex - http://www.timewatch.org
Thornborough "debate" - Hi Vis - 12th December 2005
HI Venetius
I take it from your comments that you and timewatch have been pushing EH to do this then. What has been their response?
Keep away from the light....H
Thornborough "debate" - achingknees - 13th December 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Venutius
Yes, I think Ladybridge should be scheduled - it is of national importance and it is under threat. I know that this will not stop the ploughing and I know it may well be closing the barn door after the horse has bolted but yes, if my understanding of EH's approach to scheduling is correct then this should happen, certainly for that area where the Neolithic settlement is known to extend.
Save the Thornborough Henge Complex - http://www.timewatch.org
Mmmm...scheduling in these circumstances will only lead to prehistoric features becoming an unstratified flint scatter. Where's the sense in that? Scheduling AND a binding agreement for the land to be set aside or left to pasture would be an option, but it ain't going to happen...
Thornborough "debate" - Hugh - 13th December 2005
Scheduling in this case would be like trying to cut your lawn with a chisel
. It's a good tool, but wasn't designed for this type of use.To schedule the landscape you would have to individually identify each site, it's area and the remains likely to be present (although there is flexibility for this last one with prehistoric features). You would then have to schedule each individual site/monument which would be unfeasible as every feature is not nationally important in it's own right.
You would then have hundreds of poor quality scheduled sites scattered over an enormous area. It would be all too easy for Tarmac (or whoever wanted to) to apply for scheduled monument consent to destroy them as each scheduling would have to be assessed independently, and they won't stand up on their own. Alternatively Tarmac (or whoever) would legally challenge the schedules, and would win, which would severely damage the scheduling legislation and provide precedent for further legal challenges.
You have to remember that there is no archaeological equivalent of conservation areas, which, if not designed for buildings, would be perfectly suited for the site. Well okay maybe the old AAI scheme may have applied, but it is horribly outdated and not really relevant anymore. Hmm maybe I should suggest some sort of archaeological conservation area to be thought about for the White Paper.
I'm not saying that I think the bulldozers should march in now, I'm just being realistic.
Thornborough "debate" - mercenary - 13th December 2005
I had thought some progress had been made on this forum regarding misconceptions that the public had about archaeological field practice as employed at Ladybridge. The recent press release by the Friends of Thornborough suggests otherwise.
http://www.smartgroups.com/message/viewdiscussion.cfm?gid=2845202&messageid=1188
It once again attacks the techniques and by association the archaeologists involved. And worse implies some dodgy dealing by all involved.
I for one have a lot of sympathy for the goals of the protest group, but the problem is the planning system NOT the archaeologists working with it. I suppose the archaeologists just make an easier target.}
Thornborough "debate" - mercenary - 13th December 2005
Looking at the press release again it is even more offensive than the original one that prompted this thread. I particularly love the Canadian-born description of Mr. Campling. Totally irrelevant, but clearly intended to suggest that being foreign he doesn't care about British archaeology. Jingo-istic crap.
Thornborough "debate" - freelance - 13th December 2005
Thanks for pointing out the press release Mercenary. Not only offensive, but also inaccurate:
Quote:quote:Friends of Thornborough Press ReleaseThe fact that deep ploughing would be necessary was known before anything started on site, and was the decision of the landowner. In addition, backfilling of the trenches requires waiting until the soil is sufficiently dried out. This appears to be a direct slur against 'Canadian-born' Mr Campling. I too thought progress was being made ... deep sigh.
At a monitoring meeting on site, Neil Campling, the Canadian-born County Archaeologist decided that the compaction that would be caused by mechanically backfilling the trenches with one foot of wet soil would make deep ploughing necessary to restore drainage prior to future cultivation.
Thornborough "debate" - Venutius - 13th December 2005
This is a Friends of Thornborough press release, not TimeWatch.
TimeWatch have noted the concerns of archaeologists and have moderated our stance. I have not been a member of Friends of Thornborough for more than a year.
Save the Thornborough Henge Complex - http://www.timewatch.org
Thornborough "debate" - mercenary - 13th December 2005
Thanks Venutius. It sometimes appears as a unified protest group to those not central to it.
What do you think about the press release then, in light of the discussions on this forum?