Archaeology business Headland needs to unearth a different image

[RedEarth]

probably... I have not asked them. I would guess that a developer would feel the same if told, you can't build there, its got a bat living in that tree.
as I said - saying... oh, they told me to do it does not create a strong idea of why you are doing it...
I also think we are getting confused between public support and public funding.
recently I advised a person who was about to evaluate a sensitive site beside a village... you could do well to communicate with the villagers..
the reply (perhaps in jest) was "fk em... I'll just give them the line about doing a job for the client, nothing to do with me... and if they don't like it... fk em!"
Public support may not be needed in times of plenty but sure helps to make an essentially non-essential product essential - if that makes sense- and public funded work is what I and others do with community archaeology or in local groups (which is very different from commercial archaeology - but a damn good training ground for prospective commercial archaeologists to start, seeing as there is little training in unis and the same in commercial companies )

The difference with bats and badgers is that they are legally protected (I believe) so the developer would have to deal with it, whether they like it or not.

At the end of the day a lot of things that happen on developments happen just because some planner says they should - types of roofing and windows, size and scale of development, even the use of the development. These things presumably not then go through a sub-phase of hand-wringing, they are just done.

I can understand someone not wanting to consult the local villagers about their evaluation (although the wording is a little unfortunate) - who would have the time to deal with the potential outcomes? What if the villagers form a 'save our archaeology' group? A bit difficult to cost for on what is likely to already be a tight budget. Of course approaching them first might help, but only might...

I also don't think there is much difference between public support and public funding. If the public don't support it then the excuses for funding are weakened, in every source.

A canny bit of PR by Headland, nothing more...

Indeed, and good for them. But still some good points made. I assume you're not suggesting that the point about additional value and quality of service/work being worth the additional cost is invalid?

[BAJR Host]

SO what I am getting is that you are doing temporal contamination mitigation for developers because they are told to and for no other reason? (sorry to be harsh)

this does seem to stress the point that commercial archaeology and the pursuit of research/community driven archaeology are very different.

? What if the villagers form a 'save our archaeology' group? A bit difficult to cost for on what is likely to already be a tight budget.

AArg ... imagine if people get to know about the archaeology that is happening in their village.. they can read the DSR report afterwards... after all, whats it got to do with them...etc... bloody public sticking their nose into archaeology... don't they know we are providing a service for...er... ah... we find ourselves back here again... with the one question that is avoided.

Are we temporal contamination engineers or archaeologists

[RedEarth]

SO what I am getting is that you are doing temporal contamination mitigation for developers because they are told to and for no other reason? (sorry to be harsh)
this does seem to stress the point that commercial archaeology and the pursuit of research/community driven archaeology are very different.

I quite like the sound of being described as a 'temporal contamination mitigation engineer' - archaeologist is such a messy word.

Effectively, yes I do feel that I am carrying out the work because the developers are being told to do so, but what that includes, when something of interest is found, is publication/making the results accessible and user friendly. Not to mention producing a probably quite boring but equally accessible report to boot! What more do you want? Does every site have to have two or three village elders present to make sure they know what's going on? Everyone has the opportunity to comment on applications anyway beforehand - do people also get to come and say 'I don't like those windows' or 'that paint scheme's a bit wacky' while the work is in progress? No, they don't, because developments would never be able to be completed if that happened. I totally agree with the sentiment that people should be able to find out about what's happening when it happens, but it is a bit difficult to insist on it as part of the planning condition not to mention the practical difficulties. There is a limit to the involvement the community can have as these things take place. That's why the aptly named 'community projects' are more appropriate.

I also agree that we are providing a service for the public, but there has to be some common sense about how this manifests itself. After all, you are providing a service for archaeologists but I don't expect to be able to turn up at your house, look over your shoulder, ask questions, eat your biscuits, use your toilet etc. Similarly, the local council provide a service for the public but I don't expect to be able to go and borrow their photocopiers...

We are temporal contamination engineers, the only difference between what we do and what other types of contamination engineers do is that nobody wants to see their findings in a museum or glossy report, and they certainly don't want to visit them on site.

[BAJR Host]

It seems (apart from the fact this is a discussion between only you and I) that we have agreement..

Temporal contamination engineers are not the same as the public perception of Archaeologist ... they may do roughly the same thing but teh reasons for doing it are in no way the same

If this can be seen as no bad thing AND it can be made clear the distinction... then we have a brand...

Roll on the TCE Contractor :face-angel:

[RedEarth]

Excellent, I think I agree totally. Isn't that nice!

At the end of the day, everyone does what they can and as long as it adds to the collective pot of knowledge and people are able to find out what they are interested in finding out then everyone's a winner.

If no-one else joins in it doesn't matter, I enjoy discussions with your good self - I look forward to meeting in person some day... so I can look over your shoulder, ask daft questions, eat your biscuits, and use your toilet...

[BAJR Host]

Me too.. I think discussion should be robust.. and civil... should be meaningful and have a result.

Now just to convince every archaeology company they are TCEs and to be happy with that. :p

[vulpes]

The new PPS couches Significance in terms of value to the wider public and stresses the importance of consultation with communities and is explicit about the importance of publishing results and of public participation / access to fieldwork. This takes us away from the unhelpful and over 'engineered' contamination / mitigation approach of PPG16 and consequently may do much for the improved public perception of archaeologists and archaeology.

[BAJR Host]

This would be good, if it could have some solid guidance as to how. The attitudes so far are quite clear. (of a small sample admittedly) .

Will the TCSs start engaging with the importance of consultation with communities :face-confused:

[RedEarth]

Of course, if temporary contamination engineers were able to improve their professional standing, hopefully as a result improving pay, conditions, and prospects, and perhaps be able to make a bit of profit (I know many archaeologists think this is a dirty word, but bear with me - I'm not sure how that would work in some cases as well) then they might be able to think more about how the public is engaged at the time it happens, without having to always look at the pennys. Just a thought. There are other non-archaeological companies that are able to provide money for community projects, just because they want to not because they feel obliged...

[BAJR Host]

Steady... }