PAS alert!

[garybrun]

quote:....I have to admit that I occasionally drift that way myself... particularly when I remember that so many detectorists distrust the ‘establishment’ that they set up their own scheme (UKDFD) to avoid having to benefit from my tainted tax money. Maybe it could be better spent beefing up HERs to provide some or all of the PAS service.

I would beg to differ.
Do you know why UKDFD was set up?
As one of the founders of the project I would say you haven't got a clue or have been completely misguided. As to your tainted tax payers money please feel free to send the money on as not a single penny has been claimed from the government for any of UKDFD.
With over 10,000 records and climbing and being used by academics around the world I think its quite an achievement.
In other words... I hope I'm not putting words into your mouth here?
"You can record your finds with the government scheme only"
Like you can only use the National Health System and cant use Bupa.
I think I'm banging the professional jealousy drum again.
Are you for recording or not?

If an archaeologist had built UKDFD you would all be running around patting yourselves on the back. Look what happened to Oxford Arch Digital. Rest my case.




Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[Oxbeast]

Well, as someone who genuinely doesn't know, why was UKDFD set up, Gary?

Oxbeast

Not wishing to start a flame war...

[garybrun]

quote:Originally posted by Oxbeast

Well, as someone who genuinely doesn't know, why was UKDFD set up, Gary?

Oxbeast

Not wishing to start a flame war...

MISSION STATEMENT

The UK Detector Finds Database (UKDFD) is a hobby-based initiative, which has the following aims:

To promote a recording ethos within the hobby and encourage those detectorists who would not otherwise record their finds to do so by making use of the UKDFD self-recording facility

To bring about an increase in the number of detectorists recording their finds, and the overall number of items that are recorded

To make available a facility and encourage the recording of post c.1650 finds, many of which are not eligible for inclusion on the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database

To provide an easy-to-use and supportive self-recording environment for detectorists, which employs the latest technology and methods of communication

To make the UKDFD database accessible as an internet resource for the identification and research of items recorded, and to preserve that information for the benefit of future generations

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/about.html
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/faq.html
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/our-hobbys-detractors.html



Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[vulpes]

Maybe you could start a new thread to bang the UKDFD drum in?

[tom wilson]

Gary,
as I read it, there's nothing anti-detectorist or anti-UKDFD in Sith's post. His mention of UKDFD is as an example of the failings of the PAS (as he sees it), and his post is really nothing to do with UKDFD.
Why are you getting all angry and defensive and having a pop at archaeologists again?
T

[Oxbeast]

Be fair, vulpes, I did ask him. I am a little surprised that the PAS doesn't record anything after 1650.

Perhaps it would be a good idea for the PAS and its funding, even if its reduced, to be added to other national archaeology organisations like EH, HS and CADW. These already have a regional network of offices, staff, etc with overheads already in place.

[historic building]

to quote:

1 Meaning of “treasure”

(1) Treasure is—

(a) any object at least 300 years old when found which—

(i) is not a coin but has metallic content of which at least 10 per cent by weight is precious metal;

(ii) when found, is one of at least two coins in the same find which are at least 300 years old at that time and have that percentage of precious metal; or

(iii) when found, is one of at least ten coins in the same find which are at least 300 years old at that time;

(b) any object at least 200 years old when found which belongs to a class designated under section 2(1);

© any object which would have been treasure trove if found before the commencement of section 4;

(d) any object which, when found, is part of the same find as—

(i) an object within paragraph (a), (b) or © found at the same time or earlier; or

(ii) an object found earlier which would be within paragraph (a) or (b) if it had been found at the same time.

(2) Treasure does not include objects which are—

(a) unworked natural objects, or

(b) minerals as extracted from a natural deposit,

or which belong to a class designated under section 2(2).

This is a quote from the treasure act 1986 which explains why the PAS stops at 1650 as that is, I assume, 300 yrs BP rather than bringing finds forwards by one year each year. I think, by fitting to the requirements of the treasure act the PAS have left a very open goal ( I believe that this is the correct use of a sport metaphor I have impressed myself).

[Corinne Mills]

House of Lords, 8 February 2008, Museums debate

http://ourpasthistory.com/md/debate%207%20Feb%20PAS.pdf

Mike Pitts has written another very good story in British Archaeology which is out now 8/2/2008

http://ourpasthistory.com/md/News3-1.pdf

a letter of support from a US Congressman, John Culberson

http://ourpasthistory.com/md/Culberson%20letter.pdf

[Corinne Mills]

letter which has been sent to The Searcher and Treasure Hunting magazines by Ed Vaizey MP, Conservative Party Culture Spokesman


Portable Antiquities Scheme funding crisis

In January 2007 David Lammy, then Minister for Culture, said that ‘metal-detectorists are the unsung heroes of the UK’s heritage’. But how things have changed. Now the new Minister, Margaret Hodge, seems quite happy that the only mechanism to record archaeological finds found by the public – the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) – should have its funding dramatically cut. A year is certainly a long-time in politics!
Since the PAS was established - an idea of the last Conservative Government - in 1997, we have seen more than 314,000 archaeological finds found by the public (many by detectorists) recorded for public benefit. Liaison between archaeologists and metal-detectorists has improved beyond all recognition over the last 10 years: most archaeologists recognise the benefits of co-operation with metal-detectorists and I believe the majority of detectorists think likewise. It is certainly my view that metal-detecting, if done responsibly, can make an enormous contribution to our knowledge and understanding of the past.
In fact everyone seems to agree that the PAS is such a great success, including the Minister herself, the head of the Museums, Libraries & Archives Council (through which the Scheme is currently funded), 171 MPs (from all parties) who have signed my colleague Tim Loughton' s Early Day Motion (number 566), and the many detectorists, archaeologists and other people who have written to their MPs and the Minister expressing support for PAS and concerns about its long-term future.
So why are we in a position where a Scheme, recognised by all as one of the great successes of recent years, with a multitude of benefits for all and such enormous potential for advancing our understanding of this country’s past, faces having its funding cut so dramatically?
The answer is simple, the Government has made a huge mess up. In the Comprehensive Spending Review at the end of last year, the Government imposed 25% cuts on the MLA. Whilst the British Museum manages the PAS, its funding comes through the MLA. Although the Government ring-fenced funding for big MLA projects such as Renaissance in the Regions (which delivers funding to large regional museums), it seems it forgot about the PAS and some other smaller projects that MLA ‘looks after’. What makes it more incredible that such an oversight could happen is that in the last Spending Review the PAS’s funding was ring-fenced. So why not this time?
Perhaps the Government intentionally wanted to cut funding for the PAS. I don’t think so. The Government has consistently praised the Scheme. So the only logical answer is that the Government forgot about PAS, the hard work of its Finds Liaison Officers, the dedication of detectorists (like you) who go out in all weathers to finds such amazing objects and then (most importantly) ensure they are properly recorded with the PAS, so they can add to our knowledge of the past.
So what can be done now? MLA has announced that it intends to freeze the PAS budget at £1.3M, so there will be cuts in jobs and the service offered by PAS. Ideally PAS needs £1.49M to carry on at the existing level, though I am sure the Scheme would say it would make use of more.
There is no doubt that the head of the MLA is stuck between a rock and a hard place. His organisation faces massive cuts, so he is unable to fund properly the projects he is responsible for – including the PAS. In the light of the Spending Review, we in Parliament have been asking whether the MLA offers the best home for the PAS? I think the PAS would be better housed within the British Museum, where the staff that manage it are already based. I also think that from now on the PAS is set up as a separate organisation funded through the British Museum with a separately identifiable grant. This would ensure the integrity of the PAS is maintained, that it is properly funded, and that it is based within an organisation that has a long term future.

Ed Vaizey, Shadow Minster for Culture (Conservative)

[Corinne Mills]

A good story about PAS that has come out in Museums Journal 8/2/2008

http://ourpasthistory.com/md/Museums%20J...b%2008.pdf