It is perfectly possible to open up a hard-rock silver-lead mine to the 
general public ; it is perfectly possible to offer historically &
archaeologically accurate interpretation of a mine and its history ; it is
perfectly possible to finance a wholescale scientifically researched
valorisation and interpretation project around an ancient mine ; it just has
to be in France!

Ian Cowburn
Conservateur, Centre de Culture Scientifique, Technique et Industrielle
Site Minier du Fournel
Southern French Alps

----------
>De : Evan Price <[log in to unmask]>
>À : mining <[log in to unmask]>
>Objet : Re: Alderley Project
>Date : Dim 18 juin 2000 20:56
>

> Adrian's letter regarding "head gear" and Ben's letter regarding
> preservation of mine sites leave me feeling that some members of this
> page are very naive in a very dangerous way.
> As an ex-miner, I most certainly want to see mining sites preserved,
> BUT---
> 1.     I have had too much experience with "rock" to ever consider it
> solid and safe.
>         In a working mine (where profits make it economical) drifts,
> shafts, stopes, etc.
>         are constantly being "barred" or "scaled" to make them "safe".
> I would probably
>         drive cavers to distraction by wanting to make sure that a place
> was free of loose
>         rock before entering it.  They would be angry with me when I
> insisted that they
>         should pay for any necessary rescue efforts if they got into
> trouble.  They probably
>         wouldn't understand my anger that they placed rescue personnel
> in danger.  Work
>         necessary to keep old mine sites "reasonably safe" will be so
> expensive that it could
>         only be done on a very few selected sites.  Without profits from
> ore production it is
>         unlikely that it will be possible to obtain sufficient funds for
> even those few.
> 2.    Even kept up, these sites will contain numerous hazards for the
> inexperienced.
>         Additional funds will be needed to properly guard the sites
> against entry by children
>         and naive adults. Adrianne reports that there are still 100
> standing "head gear" (In
>         our area we call them "head frames").  Even if the "shafts"
> (raises, winzes, or
>         whatever) beneath them are inaccessible, the structures,
> themselves, offer many
>         hazards for the unwary.  Are the organizations in charge of them
> posting 24-hour
>         guards around them?  If not, are they prepared to face law-suits
> because they are
>         maintaining these hazards?  One can't blame mining companies and
> governments for
>         destroying  hazards that the general populous doesn't wish to
> maintain properly.
> 3.    Governments have limited resources.  Would anyone advocate
> spending money to
>        preserve mine sites which should be spent on medicare, the
> military, or any other
>         NECESSARY program.  Those who wish to preserve these sites must
> be prepared
>         to pay the bills.  While I would love to contribute to such a
> cause, my entire pension
>         wouldn't pay for one guard.  I would be delighted to contribute
> a couple of shifts
>         per week working as a guard IF I LIVED CLOSE TO THE MINE SITE.
> That
>         would leave only 19 more shifts to be taken care of.  Perhaps,
> if a few guards are
>         attacked by hooligans, I will have second thoughts about that
> offer.
> 4.    Peter made a very valid point when he pointed out that many of the
> interested
>         societies have played their own part in destroying material, or
> at least, putting it out
>         of the reach of archaeologists. Do these people really
> understand what it is that they
>         are trying to preserve?  When they attempt to introduce a
> concept of the miner as
>         some kind of hero, I find it most naive.  Mining is a mercenary
> business and
>         everyone engaged in it is a mercenary.  Men like my father
> worked in mines from
>         necessity; hating every minute they were underground.  Men like
> myself may have
>         enjoyed the work, but we were really interested in the pay.  We
> worked harder than
>         most people on the surface, and we worked in much more dangerous
> and
>         unpleasant places.  We believed that we were entitled to higher
> pay than people in
>         other occupations and we demanded it.   If we weren't being paid
> higher pay, we
>         would have worked elsewhwere.  We have no respect for people who
>
>         go into dangerous places for simple excitement.  We had all the
> excitement we
>         needed without looking for it.  Our greatest respect went to
> those who did their
>         work even though they were afraid. We knew that we required the
> sympathy of
>         other people, when we struggled for better conditions, but we
> weren't happy with
>         those who wanted to shut all mines down.
> 5.    I have stated before on this page my conviction that museums
> cartering to the
>         general public are the only means of preserving mine sites and
> mining history.
>         This will most certainly require commercialism, and probably
> some loss of historical
>         accuracy.  In the Britannia Beach Mining Museum, all the
> concentrating machinery
>         has long since gone - probably to a working mine.  The people
> meeting the public
>         are primarily interested in selling souvenirs, etc. that will
> make money for the
>         society.  They really aren't interested in historical
> correctness (the have mislabelled
>         some of the shops I worked in and don't want to hear the
> truth).  If, however, they
>         are successful at what they are doing, they will ensure that at
> least some structures
>         are preserved (mislabelled or not!).
>
> 


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%