17th November 2016, 03:20 PM
You cant blame them if the curators are just using it as a presence or absence exercise.
Yes shirley an evaluation is an excavation but its a sample. You use the costs of undertaking it to estimate the costs for opening up the extents and predicting the techniques that will be applied to the materials and contexts that are expected to be found. Depth and type of over burden to be removed from the extent is one very simple estimate that can be made from the evaluation. The eh sites seem to have affinity to water logged materials. Finding such material leads to what you proposed to do with them that all equates to costs for a bigger excavation.
looking at the case studies https://content.historicengland.org.uk/i...udies.pdf/ again theres one with a "hospital trust" where a boat has been made a scheduled monument
that's advice between public servants about how to stand around whilst building over a scheduled monument. Whats it cost?
the Shardlow, Derbyshire boat is even more bizarre, it appears the boat was not found in evaluation but in construction and a mitigation was allowed for a haul road to be built elsewhere? No mention of evaluation. I like this quote
What were the costs of excavation eh? what are the costs of preservation in situ?
evaluation
Yes shirley an evaluation is an excavation but its a sample. You use the costs of undertaking it to estimate the costs for opening up the extents and predicting the techniques that will be applied to the materials and contexts that are expected to be found. Depth and type of over burden to be removed from the extent is one very simple estimate that can be made from the evaluation. The eh sites seem to have affinity to water logged materials. Finding such material leads to what you proposed to do with them that all equates to costs for a bigger excavation.
looking at the case studies https://content.historicengland.org.uk/i...udies.pdf/ again theres one with a "hospital trust" where a boat has been made a scheduled monument
Quote:A legal agreement was devised and has been signed by the Hospital Trust and Historic England, establishing a timetable and trigger levels for the monitoring scheme, with various events identified within the agreed timetable. The trigger levels are associated with water level and redox values. The agreement is for joint meetings annually for formal data review, although Historic England will review the data as they are gathered. An initial monitoring period of five years has been identified. If monitoring data show stability and are below trigger levels at five years, then monitoring will cease.
If the data are less clear cut, then an additional monitoring period of three years will occur. If the data have stabilized and are below trigger levels then monitoring will cease after eight years, but if the trigger levels are consistently breached at eight years, then it will be concluded that the boat is in danger, and should be excavated. The Hospital Trust will have one year to plan and fund the project (in the middle of an extremely busy hospital) and gain all the necessary permissions
that's advice between public servants about how to stand around whilst building over a scheduled monument. Whats it cost?
the Shardlow, Derbyshire boat is even more bizarre, it appears the boat was not found in evaluation but in construction and a mitigation was allowed for a haul road to be built elsewhere? No mention of evaluation. I like this quote
Quote:As the quarry company already had experience of the excavation and conservation of one log boat elsewhere in the quarry, they were keen to re-route the haul road to avoid impacting the boat and the costs of excavation and conservation
What were the costs of excavation eh? what are the costs of preservation in situ?
evaluation
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist