More thoughts from Maine:

Regardless of how we tackle the many problems raised in these worthy
discussions, I see one fundamental difference between mines and caves.
Caves are works of nature, and I would guess that most of us want to
preserve cave features such as stalactites from being defaced by vandals.

Mines and quarries, on the other hand, have all been excavated by humans
seeking mineral wealth and profit.  The miners of the 1700's and 1800's
doubtless erased some of the old surface and shallow underground workings
from earlier centuries. Modern open-pit operations, in their turn, have
wiped out some those cherished mine sites from the early industrial era.
When and where do we draw the line and try to "freeze" what remains for all
future generations?  There are so many interests at work here, that I doubt
a general consensus will be reached any time soon.  For starters, the
competing groups need to be more clearly defined, followed by attempts to
establish some general land-use principles that most people can agree on,
and finally help set priorities on a site-by-site basis. I guess that's all
pretty obvious, but it's easy to lose sight of the big picture when
discussion gets too narrrowly focused on particular case histories.
        My view of the UK situation is clouded by distance, but it sounds
like NAMHO is a worthy umbrella organization that can negotiate with the
full range of concerned parties in the mining field, and they are already
working on it.  It seems to me that most mine sites are unique, and each
needs to be considered individually in terms of local history and
geological/mineralogical importance, and then decide whether they should be
kept as-is, restored to former glory, reclaimed in cases of genuine hazards,
and/or kept open for some degree of public mineral collecting or the
possibility commercial mineral extraction in the future.

Woody Thompson
Maine Geological Survey

-----Original Message-----
From: gerda pickin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 2:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Mining Archaeology


This is a good discussion and one which - rightly- should elevate collective
blood pressures.
I agee with Martin's comments, support much of what Ian has said and can
think of many examples in Britain where enthusiasm and plain ignorance have
caused damage to underground remains.

But let's put things in perspective and look at who has really been
destroying our mining heritage over the last 20 years.  Has it been cowboy
cavers, misguided mining historians or even mineral collectors?  No, the
main agents of destruction  have been mining and quarrying companies and
local and government agencies involved in environmental projects.  How much
of Derbyshire's mining history (above and below ground) has been lost
through modern opencast fluorspar extraction?  What about the impact of
massive limestone quarrying on and around Halkyn Mountain or the effect of
forestry schemes on many of the mines of mid and north Wales?  It was only
10 years ago that most of the valley bottom tips and tailings at Wanlockhead
where removed in an environmental improvement scheme and less than 2 years
since the 17th century smelt mill at Rookhope was destroyed through an
environmental blunder.

Yes, we need to improve our own act and the new NAMHO guidelines on
archaeology and artefacts are to be welcomed.  But are we doing enough - as
individuals, society members and NAMHO - to fight  for the protection of our
mines and mining landscapes?  How effective are we at passing information on
to Sites and Monuments Records?  Should we be working more closely with our
county archaeologists?  And crucially, how good are we at lobbying our
councillors and other politicians and putting in objections to planning
applications which threaten historic mining sites ( my experience is that
far too many mining historians are passive supporters of some of the
companies actively involved in site destruction; this under the guise of "we
share similar interests and if we help them they might loan us some
equipment" or "they'll let us know if they find anything interesting")?

But  not all is doom and gloom.  The recent Draft Metal Mines Strategy for
Wales must represent something of a seachange in that it actively sought
advice from and consultation with archaeologists and minig historians.  If
it is succesful then this will be due in no small part to the input from the
Welsh Mines Society and the archaeological site data created during the
recent Clwyd and Powys mine surveys.  Could other parts of the UK respond as
effectively?  A ha' ma doots...
john pickin