Moral quandry! What would you do??

[FedUp]

So i'd need the landowners permission or they would?
It's a random field in the middle of a pipeline, so haven't got a clue unfortunately.
But i'd be surprised if they knew what was going on, the field was previously used for crops, but with the amount of lime going in, they won't be growing anything there for many years to come!!!

[BAJR]

First thing is to phone the number I gave you...

[kevin wooldridge]

[SIZE=2]Are you sure there is a problem here ? I was wondering why you referred to Agricultural lime (which is in essence a fertiliser or remidiator) as it seems to have no obvious function in the construction industry, whereas quicklime is frequently used. The following description is taken fron the US Geological Survey: [/SIZE]

[SIZE=2]'In construction, hydrated lime and quicklime are used to stabilize fine-grained soils in place of materials that are employed as subbases, such as hydraulic clay fills or otherwise poor-quality clay and silty materials obtained from cuts or borrow pits. Lime also is used in base stabilization, which includes upgrading the strength and consistency properties of aggregates that may be judged unusable or marginal without stabilization. Common applications for lime stabilization included the construction of airfields, building foundations, earthen dams, parking areas, and roads'....

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/c...7-lime.pdf

That seems alright to me ... or are you just suggesting that they are using a acceptable engineering process without taking the appropriate H&S precautions? [/SIZE]

[Stephen Jack]

I have worked on a couple of projects in New Zealand where this type of stabilization process has been used. It may look drastic but its probably on the low end of environmental damage you are likely to encounter during your career.

[Unitof1]

[SIZE=3]?So i'd need the landowners permission or they would?
It's a random field in the middle of a pipeline, so haven't got a clue unfortunately.
But i'd be surprised if they knew what was going on, the field was previously used for crops, but with the amount of lime going in, they won't be growing anything there for many years to come!!!?
[/SIZE]

I asked because you obviously feel that you have witnessed something illegal but are not sure who talk to. It?s a big pity that you do not have an agreement with the landowners or know who they are. From my view theres a bringing archaeology into distribute aspect to many of these situations. I will try and explain my view.

From the codes of the ifa on contractual agreements

[SIZE=3]On obligations to other parties

25 A member embarking upon fieldwork will secure the permission
of the landowner and tenant as appropriate, and of any others
with rights or responsibilities for the land and its safekeeping.
[/SIZE]

Your looking for a safe keeper

From anybody looking from the outside in on the pipeline would see archaeologists working along side engineers with the impression that the archaeologists had the best interests of the landowners and for the [SIZE=4]safekeeping of the archaeology. Is that you? They would imagine that any works being undertaken would have been fully considered. [/SIZE]

But pipelines are stitched up before the eias are undertaken and your permissions are taken care of in the wayleaves agreements that are negotiated by permit men before any access is given to evaluate the routes. A lot of these wayleaves are standard forms and payments agreed with organisations such as the NFU and the CLA and basically pass any heritage ?problem? over to the pipeline. As far as I am aware they don?t increase the compensation to any landowner if more archaeology is found(destroyed) on their land or not.

After the the wayleaves permissions are agreed (using threats of compulsory purchase) the pipeliners then employ their own pet archaeologists who then get their own numpties who when they start seeing things that they are not comfortable with suddenly find that they work for the people paying them who are also the ones who have already paid the archaeology off to the owners and nobody gives a monkeys.

The big question is have the archaeologists (not you presumably by implicit lack of secured permission you are not an archaeologist) secured the permission of the landowner and tenant as appropriate, and of any others with rights or responsibilities for the land and its [SIZE=4]safekeeping.[/SIZE]