> Finally, an idea that has been floated here, but not
> definitively agreed on, is the possibility that when we put
> our info on line we would only put on Monuments (as opposed
> to including events and find spots), and that those sites may
> be better mapped than the scattered points we have at the
> moment (IE polygons). The logic is (I think) that whilst we
> are obliged to give information on archaeology, that is not
> necessarily the same as giving out a copy of every record in
> the SMR. The added interpretation may be a useful way of
> helping to fudge where exactly the Gold Torc was found,
> whilst giving info about the Iron Age it represents. A bit of
> a fudge, but it is an idea to consider
>
Nice to have an option - RCAHMS put it ALL out in Canmore, and have given no
indication that grid refs for gold, detectored finds, etc. will be fudged in
CanMap (certainly didn't fudge on the trial version). The RCAHMS have no
obvious curatorial responsibility, so whilst it is in their remit to make
all the information publically available, considering (and dealing with) the
consequences is (apparently) not.
Mind you, with no Monument at Risk survey, and no national evaluation of the
impact of illicit detecting on sites, we have no way of knowing the extent
of any resulting problems in Scotland anyway.
> depressed of Maidstone.
Even gloomier of Dumfries :(
Andrew Nicholson
SMR Project Officer
Environmental Planning
Dumfries and Galloway Council
Tel: 01387 260154
Fax: 01387 260149
[log in to unmask]
http://www.dumgal.gov.uk
This e-mail is communicated in confidence. It is intended for the
recipient only and may not be disclosed further without the express
consent of the sender.
|