To continue the debate about surveying a little longer I probably need to 
give a bit more information about my approach which is to combine a number 
of methods to analyse and understand mining landscapes. This ranges from 
desktop mapping using air photographs and historic maps, including 
geological maps, to GPS mapping which is very useful for putting detail onto 
big landscapes in a short period of time, and analytical earthwork survey 
for small detailed areas.

As I presented to the Yorkshire Dales Archaeology Day at the weekend the 
mainstay of my recent work is GPS survey. In this case I have been working 
in Arkengarthdale where lead mining remains are mostly found on the high 
moorland. This is a landscape mainly dating from the 18th century containing 
shafts, dams and water leats. Ore dressing is present but almost all of the 
dressing tips have been destroyed by reworking, which went on from the early 
19th century. This means that there are very few sites that would benefit 
from detailed analytical earthwork survey, but it is an option that I have 
available and later on in the project key sites will be selected for this 
treatment. They will therefore form detailed islands within the larger 
landscape survey.  So far I have recorded an area 1500m x 700m containing 
over 100 shafts in about 6 sessions, to do the whole area as an analytical 
earthwork survey would have taken more like 6 weeks or longer and without 
funding would not have been possible.

Plotting the landscape at a scale of 1:2500 proves to be a useful scale when 
combining the surface survey with underground surveys. This is something 
that has not been mentioned so far. When examining mining landscapes it is 
essential to include the underground part of the landscape, either with new 
survey data or by reference to historic maps and plans. So far in 
Arkengarthdale we have added about 6km of new underground survey to the 
surface mapping. As with the surface survey the underground survey is 
produced at both a landscape level, by recording the centre line of levels 
using compass and tape survey, and detailed surveys of small areas either as 
tape surveys or plane table surveys produced with the aid of a laser disto. 
These detailed surveys are comparable to the analytical earthwork surveys on 
the surface.

You will see that this is therefore a multi layered and flexible method of 
approaching mining landscapes. And so far it is proving to be very 
effective.

A comment was made about a GPS survey plotting the position of a water leat 
4m away from where it was shown on a map. Could I suggest that there are 
many reasons why that may have been the case and it is likely that any error 
would not just be due to the GPS. In rural areas OS maps can have errors of 
up to almost 3m at a scale of 1:2500 and 4m at 1:10000, sometimes even more. 
As I said in an earlier message the scale at which the map is plotted 
affects how important that error is. If it is too small to plot at the 
chosen scale then it is not important. This is a problem that people often 
have when learning to survey. Thinking that everything has to be measured to 
the nearest mm, unless you are producing an engineering drawing is not 
needed.

Mike’s suggestion of having a seminar on “surveying, recording, analysis and 
the final product” would be an excellent idea and would allow us to present 
our different approaches. This may well lead to the recognition that 
different approaches have a lot to offer. I think that this will definitely 
the case when it comes to the analysis and final product.

Martin Roe


President, Northen Mine Research Society,nmrs.co.uk

Conservation Officer NAMHO, National Association of Mining History 
Organisations, http://www.namho.org

Lead Mining in the Yorkshire Dales, 
http://www.martinroe.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Meerstone Archaeological Consultancy 
http://www.martinroe.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/meerstone.htm