1st June 2004, 07:46 PM
Surely a WB is the result of a sensible compromise between the developer and the archaeology. A site may have a low potential for archaeology which is deemed to be of enough interest to have a look but is economically unfeasible to excavate. So we either cancel the development or cut the work down to a WB and everybody is reasonably happy.
I agree that a WB normally finds very little, are often badly recorded and generally can be seen as an inadequate excavation but there is no reason for this if done properly.
It does rely on good communication with the developers. I'm fed up with driving 20 miles to see a trench being filled with the last drops from the cement lorry.
On a lighter note they do et me out of the office, an hours drive listening to the cricket, quick chat with a machine driver and a wander around the site. Jobs a good un.
I agree that a WB normally finds very little, are often badly recorded and generally can be seen as an inadequate excavation but there is no reason for this if done properly.
It does rely on good communication with the developers. I'm fed up with driving 20 miles to see a trench being filled with the last drops from the cement lorry.
On a lighter note they do et me out of the office, an hours drive listening to the cricket, quick chat with a machine driver and a wander around the site. Jobs a good un.