London-Birmingham rail link HS2

[Sith]

That is always the rub. Current archaeological excavation always destroys some information, we just don't have the technology to record everything that might be vitally important to future researchers.

And at any moment in time we never will have the technology. In the situation under discussion there comes a point when you have to decide if it?s better to ?save what you can? or let it be destroyed because you can?t do it justice.

Some consultants, and pretty much all engineers still consider archaeology exists only in small defined sites, with large areas of blank in between.

We certainly don?t believe that to be the case here at VMP, however, even with our powers of persuasion it is impossible to justify substantial expense (be it taxpayer?s or individuals) on the off chance that there might be something there.

Watching brief methodologies invariably mean large amounts of archaeological features are missed, either through some remains being difficult to spot in the short time between stripping and tracking or trench excavation, the (sometimes) inexperience of the person doing the watching, pressure to release areas from managers or the client, dirty tactics by the engineers or ground crews the list goes on. You just have to look at publications of some linear projects, especially by overlying the impact footprint over the 'excavation' areas and 'watching brief' areas to see all those archaeological features magically stopping at the start of the watching brief areas.

Perhaps a strip, map and sample methodology would have been better because a watching brief is just that - watching. At least with SMS the archaeologist is in control and a more appropriate machining method would be used (a 360 with a toothless bucket rather than a bulldozer or grader). By the sound of it that?s what your fictional digger is doing so he should be on the phone to the Consultant rather than his boss, as it?s his job to shout at the construction contractor and remind him that he?s in breach of his emplyer's planning conditions.

A shocking but seemingly unstoppable current working methodology involves stripping a 5-10m wide strip under archaeological conditions along the length of the corridor. If you don't find any archaeology within that strip, the rest of the topsoil within the 20m, 30m etc wide impact footprint gets bulldozed off, destroying any trace of the archaeology just outside the initial strip.

Hmm, recent experiences in Ireland should be a lesson to anyone who advocates that. It doesn?t matter how much of a sample you excavate, there?s always room for a site of National importance to be lurking just beyond the baulk.