Thank you Trevor for your contribution,  this seems to sum-up the reality of
the UK situation.

I believe that the UK Underground community has to get to grips with the
changing approach to underground archaeology.  This means that  eventually
the sporting side of the business has to accept that there will be
restrictions on what they do and where they go. The free access to
everywhere is of  the past and we must all be more responsible in our
attitude, dare I say that we should be more professional?  Hard as it may be
to accept, my experience at Nenthead is that there are a significant number
of people who find it extremely hard to accept that times have changed.
Some of those people are members of NAMHO organisations. We are not talking
about hundreds of thousands of people in our UK community - we probably all
know who they area.  Time to face up to the hard decisions.

However, it is worth reminding the archaeologists that the majority of
underground people are responsible...all they need is a little education.
Some of our archaeology might have been buried, hidden or lost if it had not
been for the eforts of the unwashed amateur mine explorer. The explorers
have led the archaeologists, they just don't have the training.

Courtesy of the UK state via English Heritage,  the North Pennines Heritage
Trust employs a professional archaeologist at Nenthead.  Why not come and
join us?  Stop fighting, move ahead.





-----Original Message-----
From: mining-history [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Trevor Dunkerley
Sent: 12 March 2002 21:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NAHMO and others


I have been somewhat saddened to read the apparent "differences" between
those who have an interest in 'the ground beneath our feet'.

As one who first started going underground for both archaeological, and
geological interests, and the sheer thrill of it back in the late 1940's,
(and I hope by giving my age away I will not be subject to ageist remarks),
and when mining historians, achedemics, archaeologists, and geologists were
very thin on the ground, and speleology hadn't been invented, those of us
who dared to venture into dark recesses had to make up guidelines as we went
along.

Then there was no NAHMO, no associations for Caving groups, none of the
plethora of guideline information available today. And yet there were those
of us who saw our explorations of our mining heritage as a privilege to
reveal to the world the mysteries of the underground, and provided many of
our museums with the first examples of mining artefacts, properly extracted
and recorded.

There was of course the cowboys. Those who seemed set only upon drunken
destruction. I remember a wonderful system full of the most magnificent
gypsum flowers which were smashed to oblivion, the Bass blue label bottles
left in their place. Somehow I could have expected that in the 40's, but not
today.

My retirement has allowed me to return to that which I left behind in my
youth. I have been suprised to note, even with the guideline recommendations
which now exist, that there are still serious problems, and such guidelines
are ignored, even by NAHMO member groups. When I recently challenged one
group, I was called a troublemaker which led to my disassociation.

I not a qualified archaeologist, or speleologist, or achedemic, but I do
know the difference between right from wrong, and will not have my integrity
abused.

As far as I am concerned the NAHMO guidelines are excellent, (I just wish
there could be greater emphasis on safety) and I believe member groups,
especially those who join to take advantage of NAHMO insurance, should have
to show that they are carrying out the recommendations with full
implementation.

To close, whilst debate is of the essence, the way forward is to work
together despite our differences, and to challenge those who are in flagrant
breach of the most basic of guidelines wether from Caving Associations or
Mining History Groups.

regards,

Trevor