7th September 2007, 05:01 PM
all good points Steve. I definitely think a 'promise to record' form is a very good idea. It may serve to nudge the conscience of those who may be tempted to pinch a find or two.
Mr Host, I am not sure what you mean about most archaeologists who work on pipelines not being vetted. They are vetted by means of a CV/job application and checking their references, after which they are subjected to an exhaustive Health and Safety briefing and induction before being allowed on site. In the area where I work, curators have started asking for CVs of all staff on a given project. Vetting of the personnel involved in such a project is an issue of the utmost importance i think. If archaeology is trying to head towards some kind of nationally recognised accreditation system, then perhaps detectorists should follow their lead?
Mr Host, I am not sure what you mean about most archaeologists who work on pipelines not being vetted. They are vetted by means of a CV/job application and checking their references, after which they are subjected to an exhaustive Health and Safety briefing and induction before being allowed on site. In the area where I work, curators have started asking for CVs of all staff on a given project. Vetting of the personnel involved in such a project is an issue of the utmost importance i think. If archaeology is trying to head towards some kind of nationally recognised accreditation system, then perhaps detectorists should follow their lead?