1st September 2011, 01:48 PM
Wax Wrote:So in reality the only archaeology actually monitored in Britain is that which is a direct result of development control? You would have thought that before we thought about internal standards we ought be thinking about a robust monitoring system for all archaeology. I had presumed that by agreeing to Valletta this country had signed up to international standards. it would be nice to think that part of the County Archaeologists role was to have the over view of all the archaeology that went on in his/her county it would also be common courtesy for academics and amateurs to at least keep the county archaeologist informed of what they're doing. Seems to me we need some joined up thinking across the board especially if as some people believe we are seeing the demise of development led archaeology.
i think you will find that many academics and amateur groups are in constant touch with the county archaeologist whilst working in their areas. although not necessarily monitoring in the same way as they do with development control, it is still possible to affect the quality of work undertaken, advise on local research agendas and even contribute to the research design. this is how it was before ppg16 and will no doubt be with nppf
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers