16th February 2008, 03:29 PM
Oops, have to apologise with regard to saying the WSI was sent to the developer by the curator - having looked into it further I realise the WSI was sent to the council planners NOT the developer.
However, my overall concern over curator and contractor relationships remains the same. I have seen lists of units that have undertaken work within a county sent to developers by a curator with their associated unit written in bold and a larger font than any of the other units to make them stand out.
Sorry, for the mistake, but am still intereted in people's views on conflicts of interest in commercial archaeology!
Moby
However, my overall concern over curator and contractor relationships remains the same. I have seen lists of units that have undertaken work within a county sent to developers by a curator with their associated unit written in bold and a larger font than any of the other units to make them stand out.
Sorry, for the mistake, but am still intereted in people's views on conflicts of interest in commercial archaeology!
Moby