Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
sandal on bajr. I can only apologise hosty for I know not what. I think that you have edited out a quote about not valuing archaeology that a council has gone out of its way to say in its yearly public account. I have then tried to work out who owns access to the archaeology archives and what they do all day which appears to be worry about pensions and austerity and distort the wedding industry. The thing is that field archaeologists are the ultimate product of austerity. The Treasury started separating us from our archives even before ppg16 times and we are now in the situation where we cant give any to pdurdin. It noticeable that nobody on bajr has "volunteered" any
hello hosty we don't often see you much round these parts. Definitely don't see any other moderators. Its all very virtual. Have you got any thoughts on pdurdin trying to get access to local archives. You dont think that "they" are only going to give pdurdin access by charging for access? Bit like they charge tuition fee for teaching archaeology to students? Whats ifas official line. I would have thought that its about time that they want all artefacts to belong to the crown like its does in Scotland.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Marc Berger Wrote:hello Dino do you know who the charges are paid to? I cant find an obvious account in either the city or the trusts accounts. The council has this to say about the value of new archaeology not sure what they mean by "initially recognised at cost". Do you tell the council how much it cost to produce the archaeology?
You don't deposit many archives, do you? You have to negotiate a cost per box to dump all that smashed up crockery, fragmented roadkill and assorted hard-core (sorry, CBM...) into their stores in perpetuity (or until they have a clear-out somewhere down the line). Think you've been looking at figures for museum acquisitions - stuff they've paid for and which has an intrinsic resale value, and which can therefore appear in their balance sheets - completely different kettle of fish to the worthless tonnage we dump on them
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
sorry Dino hosty edited my post so its not as incoherent as it could be. I don't deposit any archives and I particularly don't deposit archives in museums that charge. I thought that the point of museums charging was to stop archaeologists mindlessly dumping stuff on them. I have always thought that museums charging was a reiteration of
http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/defa...ives_2.pdf Quote:3.8.2 In England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man ownership of objects rests
with the landowner, except where other law overrides this (eg Treasure Act, 1996,
Burials Act 1857). In Scotland, in the absence of an original owner or his/her
demonstrable heir, ownership of objects rests with the Crown. The archaeologist
undertaking the fieldwork or the planning archaeologist must make this clear at the
inception of the project (in the brief/project outline, specification or project design).
I always make it clear to my clients and how expensive it is to get rid of this stuff and that one option would be for them to give all the swapsies to me. This is as close to charity that I get although it has always been my intention to find a buyer for this stuff. I cant say I have ever seen my local mounties making things like ownership clear to the landowners and I thought that the museums putting charges on was their way of making it clear. Who knows what making it clear means but I don't think that I wasn't making it clear but the way they go on about it round my way you would think that I had done something wrong. Its a bit different in hostys neck of the woods but then they have a different hold on bailment or rather the crown does.
I don't think that I have been looking at the wrong figures and in accountancy terms your tonnage cannot possibly be worthless even if its a liability and requires insurance or rent or conservation. To get it to be worth exactly zero would be an accountants dream and one way they try to do it is to say its priceless or irreplaceable which still does not get them out of the conservation, rent or insurance figures. All I did is propose that two sets of accounts easily available as they should be may hold the answer. What I was trying to find out from the figures was who could give permission (or not) for pdurdin to access the archives and if they were in the habit of funding any research by wondering who you paid your charge to, as the kept in the dark field archaeologist might imagine that that they who took the charge might be the custodians? But they have these trusts and these trusts have trading arms and before you know it they call themselves groups but the assets are accounted for somewhere else. Anyway as a result of being a self employed archaeologist you get sensitive to the cold winds of competition and tend to question everything as a full conspiracy and why not because you have got all the ingredients, trust funds, obscure group relations and multimillion pound deficits which being you are specifically excluded from. And in self employment you have to pay taxes on fees and if VAT is involved you have to collect tax on behalf of the government and its all very interesting because maybe we all should be following suit. Whats ridiculous is that poor old pdurdin just wanted to do a bit of innocent case study, how random is that. Anyway the up side is that hosty has shot up from his face book and gone all editory on a simple little post which means that he got a telephone call from somebody who is probably in the same grandpoobar lodge........and I am about to get banned which has never happened to me before.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Think the reason for museums charging is cos they have to buy new buildings occasionally, and pay people to look after the stuff/change the silica gel occasionally? The Yorkshire Museum store must have cost a fortune [it's huge] and is run commercially to the extent that it has to pay for itself
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Archived material is specifically there to be used by interested parties (that's the whole point of putting it in a 'public' archive), so in theory all you have to do is apply to the museum in question, although there's been some hoo-ha recently from the Prehistoric Society about some museums charging for the privilege (there's something about it somewhere quite recent on the news bit of this forum)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2010
Marc, maybe pdurdin could quantitatively assess the quality of some of your extensive in-house archives for one of his case studies. What is your scale of charges for access?
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
14th May 2015, 07:34 PM
(This post was last modified: 18th May 2015, 01:21 PM by BAJR.)
Don’t know Hamish I am only recently coming up to speed on this and charges, I am mostly stuck in principles.
<BAJR Edit - I sure unintended, but is suggesting unethical practice) [B]BAJR Edit >[/B] A significant amount of the cost price now is being generated by HER fees, brief and planning discharge fees. On a small watching brief these fees can be anywhere between a third and a half of the potential cost price and that's before I have bagged any cbm.
I think Dino the news thing was this
http://www.museumsassociation.org/museum...for-access
Somebody in the comments has picked up on best to throw mud by being anonymous.
Or the news thing might have been this
http://www.museumsassociation.org/commen...y-archives
which refers to a 2012 report which can only say archaeology if it brands it commercial when it patently isn't.
Which seems to have been responded to by this magnificent group
http://www.museumsassociation.org/museum...-unethical
Nice use of "not unethical". Now I cant say that I know if a museum archaeologist does their own field work so I don’t know how they would work out student assessing charges that I should consider for pdurdin. I don’t imagine that I am local as I am not even local to my museum.
Also access is a bit tricky as I have to get the mower out of the way:
Quote:Museum store must have cost a fortune [it's huge] and is run commercially to the extent that it has to pay for itself.
well if its commercial to that extent it bound to have cost a fortune. Wonder if there was a business plan and which of the big four banks funded it? Let us guess.....
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
15th May 2015, 08:47 AM
(This post was last modified: 18th May 2015, 01:22 PM by BAJR.)
Something not picked up in your thread is what do you mean by an archive?
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
An archive = the complete product of the excavation. Everything that would be deposited in a museum, plus a few bits extra such as published books/articles where they exist.
Incidentally, access to archives will be included in the assessment, so I can quantitatively account for having to move your mower out of the way.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2015
Have you approached York Archaeological Trust (not the same as York Museums Trust)? YAT is a registered museum and has extensive site archives from the 1970s onwards.
