Who is accountable????

[garybrun]

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Bajr jury you have got it all wrong and misunderstood me.

quote:“So, you're keeping a collection of similarly unsubstantiated rumours of archaeological misdeeds are you Gary? Considering the support that 'good detectorists' get from most of us here, the idea that you are collecting examples of 'bad archaeologists' disturbs me. Could it be that you are storing up ammunition for a possible future mudslinging contest over the legality of metal detecting, or some similar motive”?

Lets me answer this post and with all honesty.

Some of you are so hypocritical.
You run around chanting your morals to all and sundry on how you are responsible for the archaeological record and then when some one ask you about it or shows flaws in the system you get all high and mighty about it.
Certain members of your profession go around collecting information and fire it at the metal detecting hobby and paint everybody with the same brush.
Because some members say “nice” words of support for “good detectorists” that should exempt Bajr and your profession from scrutiny???????? Do you want a medal and a little certificate to congratulate you on your "good support"????

Some of you are a public body and should be accountable … because you are recording “my” heritage, “my kids” and others. So please get of your high horse.
There is no mud slinging required over the legality of metal detecting because it is a legal act. That’s what many of you forget or cant accept.
The archaeological establishment is shouting from the roof tops that I and other detectorists should be accountable for my activities and “record” our finds. Which I do and I promote more than many of could know on here.

quote:“Chris Currie was an excellent archaeologist who left a legacy of research and books. He was also a nice guy who died too soon. The finds may have been temporarily misplaced, but Chris left a lifetime of properly archived records. Gary I suggest you read one of his books then look at UKDN and ask yourself who should be embarrassed”.

My sincere apologies if you think I am speaking ill of the dead… I’m not.
I do not know Chris Currie nor that he left a legacy of properly archived finds but I am sure he would have also questioned the loss of the finds if he could??? I am an English man living in Norway asking a question regarding missing artefact's. Again you get all defensive and protective and think “I” should be embarrassed. Embarrassed for what???
I never said “Chris” should be embarrassed….. I meant the “System”
So please stop trying to spin that Im speaking ill of the dead.


http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[garybrun]

quote:Originally posted by historic building

Frankly this is just offensive to a great archaeologist who died too soon and is no longer here to defend himself.

Why is it offencive???
I'm sure he was a great archaeologist who died to soon. May he rest in peace and I mean that with all sincerity.

That's not the point... no matter how you want to spin it. I asked a question regarding who are archaeologists accountable too. Yet a few choose to skip the question because it touches on areas you don't want to discuss??? David came back with straight answers... as I'm sure he understood what my question was about.

This thread does really make some of you look so "hypocritical".
Practise what you preach.

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[BAJR Host]

>>>> Care in Thread required <<<<<

The question is who are archaeoligsts accountable too... and what happens when finds - rarely - go missing. As this is to highlight a suggestion that archaeologists should practice what they preach... they do, we have a system in place (which on very rare occasions) fails. We are in fact having trouble with archives, in that they are getting too big. With all due respect, the UKDFD and the PAS recording systems are - at this point in time... way way behind anywhere near either the regulation or the 100% recording of archaeologists... every find... every feature, every photo, every report, plan, map, sample etc etc etc... Detectorists only deal with finds... and although the recording method is growing (thanks to people like yourself Gary) it has a way to go before 100% recording takes place. And when that happens.. I would not expect - no matter how foolproof the system - that every single object could be located immediately...

I am just trying to suggest that I am in need of a peaceful day.

One lost tupperware box in an otherwise well kept archive - not something I would worry about... as it is bound to turn up on the wrong shelf, or in a cupboard... As it stands just now, there are 'archives' that will never see the light of day. I feel the accusation of hypocritical only stands up when the hypocrite is doing the same... (I would suggest that an extensive archive system that involves all aspects of an archaeological investigation is not the same - even if there is the rare failure)


"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[garybrun]

The accusation of hypocritical was directed towards
"You must listen to what we say, we can discuss your activities... but you have no right to question our archaeological motives or activities"

And because they odd few say "nice things" should you be exempt from these??

I believe heritage is for all and many museums are keeping "their lights under a bushel"

When it comes to being "anywhere near either the regulation or the 100% recording of archaeologists... every find... every feature, every photo, every report, plan, map, sample etc etc etc" your never going to get that and you know it. We as the general public expect more from the archaeologists or do you think we shouldn't???
These records have been missing since May 2005. I hope they do turn up.

quote:OK who are archaeologists accountable too???
We have all this talk about ,heritage, recording etc.
How can things like this happen????
What back up systems are in place???

now don't all get defencive on me... real answers please.

My original question... not about PAS, UKDFD, dead people etc.. about archaeologist in general. Can some of you not answer simple questions or do you see every question as part of the "war between archaeology and metal detecting"???

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[m300572]

"Where did you get it?"

I think it was circulated on Britarch.

Gary's question about who we are answerable to is a reasonable one - if you are outside the profession but affected by its decisions its fair to know! This applies to everyone - most people I spoke to in my time in Development Control work had little understanding of the system that required them to spend sometimes substantial sums of money on archaeological work. I refer here to the private citizens building extensions and conservatories, or a house for their retirement who had to carry out archaeological work rather than the big companies and builders (although some of them were pretty clueless as well!)

To answer the question on my own behalf, as a mamber of the IFA I am answerable professionally to the Codes of Conduct and the like of the Institute of Field Archaeologists and for my day to day conduct I am responsible to my management (which ultimately ends up with David Milliband, Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs).

[garybrun]

Thanks for that Peter.

To be fair too some... I have asked this question before... http://www.bajr.org/BAJRForum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=788 and was seeing if I could get more debate outside of the detecting forum. as someone who is for recording and "pro archaeology", how am I to get the message across if archaeologists cant discuss their own failings while sabre rattling their own views and misinterpreting what is being asked in a simple question.

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[BAJR Host]

Phew.... back on track again. I think it was a misunderstanding of the question... nothing more...


"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Steven]

Gary
You have asked an interesting question and one well worth trying to answer because your right, some of us are publicly accountable. Basically all work carried out as part of the planning process (which is over 90% of work in Britain) is subject to control by the Local Planning Authority (who are usually advised by a County/District archaeological officer). If an LPA sets conditions on a planning permission (or requires pre-determination evaluation) and they decide the archaeological evaluation or mitigation is insufficient (i.e. not fit for purpose) they can either declare the development invalid (or take enforcement action) or refuse planning permission. As all LPAs are governed by elected members, in theory its you (and me) through your (our) locally elected representatives who archaeologists are accountable to. However, in practice because most archaeologists are within the private sector they are only really accountable to voluntary codes (such as the IFA standards). However, county/district archaeologists are of course accountable to the public through their employer and the councils complaints/disciplinary procedure.

Steven

[garybrun]

Thanks Steven.
That's what I was looking for.
Now ... moving on
Why is such a profession (of high regard in my opinion)only subject to voluntary codes and not compulsory codes? Why is an archaeologist not a recognised profession and why don't you fight to have it so(I can call myself an archaeologist and nobody could say different... could you???.
In another thread you have been talking about a large publicity campaign.
I believe you will never get any where with it until you start answering simple questions like the ones I have asked.


http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording OUR heritage for future generations.

[1man1desk]

You could look at accountability at several levels.

Generally speaking, archaeologists are directly accountable for individual pieces of work to whoever is paying - usually a developer client.

The developer client is accountable to a public body - usually the planning authority, who are advised by the curatorial archaeologists.

If the work is not done to spec, or in some other way does not meet professional standards, and if the planning authority is willing to back-up the curator, then they may take action against the developer. If the developer suffers as a result, they can seek redress from the archaeological contractor under the terms of the contract, as long as the fault is a breach of the terms of the contract. If the fault was a result of bad advice from a consultant, then the consultant could face a Professional Indemnity claim.

The only way the curator or planning authority can take action directly against the archaeological contractor is to try to prevent them from working within their jurisdiction again - but their powers to do so are very limited.

The whole thing is backed up by an accepted code of ethical behaviour amongst archaeologists. However, there is no system to enforce this, unless the archaeologists are members of the IFA or the organisation is an RAO, in which case the IFA have some disciplinary powers.

Not a strong system of accountability at all, and many of us do want it to be strengthened. My own preferred model for this is for the IFA to become a Chartered institute, and for the title 'archaeologist' to become a controlled title that can only be used by individuals endorsed by the IFA.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished