>I would agree with Martin that vegetation surveys are likely
>to be more profitable - and they are also cheaper than doing soil
>analyses!
Sallie,
Surely if such a survey was to be effective, cheap and, perhaps more to the
point, quick it would rely on having sufficient skilled personel on the
ground - and your later comment on having to return to the field at
different seasons emphasises the time involved. Would not soil sampling have
the benefit of requiring only semi-skilled personel on the ground with the
real expertise concentrated in the lab. I'm sure I could interpret soil
sample data but, whilst I can recognise 'leadwort' in flower, out of season
it and the others they could just be buttercups.
I can appreciate the value of a flora survey by someone who has the skill
and is able to visit and revisit the potential sites over a long time scale.
But in the scenario of today's archaeological funding a soil sampling
programme would probably be more cost effective.
Peter
______________________________________________
Peter Claughton, Blaenpant Morfil, Rosebush, Clynderwen,
Pembrokeshire, Wales SA66 7RE.
Tel. 01437 532578; Fax. 01437 532921; Mobile 07831 427599
University of Exeter - School of Historical, Political and Sociological Studies
(Centre for South Western Historical Studies)
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Co-owner - mining-history e-mail discussion list.
See http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/mining-history/ for details.
Mining History Pages - http://www.exeter.ac.uk/~pfclaugh/mhinf/
_____________________________________________
|