Gloucester Council next....

[Unitof1]

P Perntis - only if you explain why they cant but have you tried ring up a planning office and ask for advice for a planning application and say that you are worried about archaeology?

shadow -I dont understand enlighten what?

[Sparky]

Thanks Sith!

[Marcus Brody]

Just to clarify my position, I'm not having a go at Council curatorial services with attached field units per se, I just think that there needs to be a clear division between bodies undertaking commercial fieldwork and bodies monitoring the standard of that fieldwork on behalf of the Council. I think that differentcolourmud makes a valid point about Councils operating as both curators and contractors taking great care to ensure a clear business separation because of the potential for people to complain, and because as public bodies they're open to Freedom of Information requests. In fact, it's probably precisely because organisations such as this are subject to public oversight of this type that it hasn't been an issue in the past. I'd probably be more concerned about commercial companies taking over curatorial functions while continuing to act as contractors or consultants, as they would not be publically accountable to the same extent, and I'm not sure whether they'd be subject to FOI, even if acting as subcontractors to a Council.

My preferred model for conducting commercial archaeology would be for each Council to have its own unit and undertake work only in that area, allowing detailed local knowledge to develop. Given that we're unlikely to get this system, however, due to the commercial model that's been in place for the last 20 years, I'd settle for one where there is a curatorial body / individual whose sole function is to advise the Council on the need for archaeological work and to scrutinise the quality of work done by commercial contractors. Maybe it's just me, but I'd prefer that this role wasn't undertaken by someone who'll be tendering against me for work in the future. It's not a matter of financial advantage or undercutting, it's more a question transparency.

[BAJR]

Returning to the Topic...

I have had this reply from the Councillor

....this is just one element of many savings in the Council's three year money plan.

Our assessment is that maintaining the City's Historic Environment Record and providing advice in the development process will be possible with one qualified archaeologist with some time still available to support project work, including some community engagement.

It is proposed that this archaeologist post together with the Principal Conservation Officer and the Conservation Projects Officer will be located in the Development Control Service to make further savings through revised management arrangements.

However, please be aware that, in addition to the above resources, the City Council has a separate Museums Service which also has a responsibility for increasing access and awareness of the City's heritage. The City's Museums are currently undergoing a major refurbishment and we are committed to finding new ways to tell the Gloucester story including holding at least one major event each year, with frequently changing exhibitions at the City's Folk Museum. We also intend to make improvements to the interpretation of our monuments and buildings.

I do hope this explains the position clearly but do come back to me if I can help further. I hope you will appreciate that the Council is having to make some difficult choices to cope with the very challenging budget cuts.

What I find interesting in the (to be honest unexpected ) reply was the element about teh Museums Service. They have it seems made them selves 'more' useful, than archaeology. IF this is the case, one has to take a cold hard look at 'archaeology' and say... what the fck does it do? Museums, yup, I see that, Galleries... ok, artcies, photographers etc...

What does archaeology do that is of any real use?


Answer that one... or vanish.


The other option is to be part of the whole, the Museum, the School, the club, the societies, the social change, the gallery, the rehabilitation... make yerself useful... :face-huh:

[P Prentice]

[SIZE=3]

as bajr himself implodes in frustration i think it opportune to consider PPS5 in this context:-

The Government’s overarching aim is that the historic environment and its heritage
assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and
future generations. To achieve this, the Government’s objectives for planning for the
historic environment are:
• to deliver sustainable development by ensuring that policies and decisions
concerning the historic environment:
–– recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource
–– take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental
benefits of heritage conservation; and
–– recognise that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if
heritage assets are to be maintained for the long term.
• to conserve England’s heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their
significance by ensuring that:
–– decisions are based on the nature, extent and level of that significance,
investigated to a degree proportionate to the importance of the heritage asset
–– wherever possible, heritage assets are put to an appropriate and viable use
that is consistent with their conservation
–– the positive contribution of such heritage assets to local character and sense
of place is recognised and valued; and
–– consideration of the historic environment is integrated into planning policies,
promoting place-shaping.
• to contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our past by ensuring that
opportunities are taken to capture evidence from the historic environment and

to make this publicly available, particularly where a heritage asset is to be lost.

all these points should generate work for professional archaeologists but i would draw your attention to the last sentence and submit that as a profession we have spectacularly failed to keep the public informed of what we do and why it is worth doing it
[/SIZE]

[BAJR]

[SIZE=3]all these points should generate work for professional archaeologists but i would draw your attention to the last sentence and submit that as a profession we have spectacularly failed to keep the public informed of what we do and why it is worth doing it[/SIZE]

How true.

Though with my Past Horizons hat on, we are trying to get more commercial archaeologists to report... and we are getting more. And damn, but they are good, interesting and useful means to contribute and 'make publicly available.'

More please (and we are writing 3 more just today)

http://www.pasthorizons.com/index.php/ar...-rich-past

http://www.pasthorizons.com/index.php/ar...estershire

http://www.pasthorizons.com/index.php/ar.../2011/9473

http://www.pasthorizons.com/index.php/ar...discovered

[BAJR]

I am just putting up another article that shows the US archaeologists are going through the same trauma and self analysis.
see The American view of dull archaeology.

[Boxoffrogs]

Having run an SMR/HER I can confirm that the solo archaeologist will be doing a 50/60 hour week to keep up and that assumes that he/she is able to manage and write the HBSMR in GCC. I can hear ExiGesis giggling from behind the scenes as they see more calls for expensive help....

[GPStone]

perhaps one of the assembled luminaries could explain just how a local authority contractor can have an unfair advantage over a private contractor?

Sorry about the lack of lumination, but I'll give it a shot. Some (please note some, not all) LA units have access to storage, office and other such facilities at reduced rates, thus reducing their overheads. However, the fact that they may be required to conform to LA spinal pay points and any pension committments which they may be liable for (depending on their strucure and association to the LA) can reduce any advantage of this. And its all irrelevant considering that any council is unlikely to want to have anything 'unneccessary' or otherwise costly linked to it right now. The result? Unless a council unit is making a significant profit for the council, its unlikely to remain under LA ownership for much longer. Ditto university units.

[Unitof1]

as far as I am concerned is if I can get to the client first I win access to the field work. If the planning officer in any way points a potential developer towards the councils archaeology by what ever association and that inclueds the fact that the unit supplies the curators I see that as a commercial advantage. Go figure... go ring up your local planning department and see if you can get a recomendation for what ever unit out of them....

the fact that I might be chasing evaluations rather than watching brief makes the difference between going on holiday in skegness or scotland or ireland or wales