13th August 2008, 09:11 AM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Unitof1
Personally I think the bigger archaeological firms don't like it as they try to hide their profit methods from their field staff.
There can't be many archaeologists (or employees in any business/trade), who haven't worked out that their employer is charging far more for their services than they are paid. Or even that their employer must be charging enough to take on the 'risk' of finding something interesting (or anything at all).
(I have put my tinfoil hardhat on).
Quote:quote:
In my area the curators have totally expunged the watching brief term from all of their briefs...
This is more interesting. I have always seen the watching brief as a perfectly legitimate methodology when used in the correct situation: i.e. that despite evaluation, an area of perceived archaeological potential has not produced any evidence. It's a 'last chance' evaluation technique rather than a mitigation measure in itself.
Quote:quote:
Has anybody been asked to get rid of the topsoil, apparently you can get ?40 a tonne. I think that it has got quite interesting sideline/ethic possibilities during the credit crunch.
Only if you have some incredibly naive/thick clients. I have yet to meet a developer/builder who is unaware of the value (or do I mean price?) of topsoil. Stopping people stealing the stuff has long been a problem, particularlly on large jobs and there are many tales of them discovering an 'extra' lorry, taking loads away to heaven knows where.
D. Vader
Senior Consultant
Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants
Your lack of archaeological imagination disappoints me Curator