19th September 2005, 07:29 PM
Venutius-agreed wholeheartedly. Regardless of what is written as law/codes of practise/guidelines or otherwise-corporate lobbyists usually win the day. 1man1desk-whilst I accept that on rare occasions, preservation in situ is enforced, when you compare "several" known examples of this to the frequencies of day to day fieldwork carried out in the UK where no such thing virtually ever happens, the "several" seem rather insignificant. In the case of Thornborough, I very much doubt that a commercial evaluation will do the site credit. Stonehenge for example, has been explored intrusively for donkies years and if the truth be known, only recent evaluatory endeavours have shown just what a complex and unique environment the area is. I suppose that Tarmac are hoping that ppg driven fieldwork will tip the scales in their favour...why not, ppg has been doing just that for 20 years unchecked. Leave Thornborough alone.Commercial archaeology and the pathetic "laws", guidelines and pseudo legal wrangling that leave loopeholes big enough to drive a million developers through, is just inept, contrived and innapropriate in such a landscape. You may as well just send slime team in..........