it all seems quite a complex issue. According to 'Managing lithic scatters;
archaeological guidance for planning authorities and developers' (EH/ Lithic
Studies Society/Prehistoric Society 2000), lithic scatters are "unlikely to
be afforded statutory protection through scheduling, except in a very few
cases". It seems scheduling can only be applied to "buildings, structures or
works...or the remains thereof", and the guidance suggests that few scatters
could be defined as a monument under the terms of the act. It also points
out that scheduling would have little affect if the threat is coming from
ploughing, due to class consent. Instead the guidance suggests destruction
can be controlled by other means, such as agri-environmental schemes, PPG16
or archaeological recording. As for sites of high palaeo-environmental
importance, I guess that the same problem applies, only 'monuments' can be
scheduled. Such sites could, however, be designated SSSIs or similar, I
believe the original Swanscombe quarry- the Barnfield pit- has become a
nature reserve on the basis of it being a 'site of outstanding scientific
hope this is of some interest,
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Petts" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 4:22 PM
Subject: Scheduling Query
> I've got a couple of queries concerning the application of scheduled
> monument legislation to some classes of prehistoric sites.
> - Is it possible for lithic scatters to be Scheduled? If it is possible in
> theory, have there been any examples of such designation in practice?
> -Is it possible to Schedule sites of high palaeoenvironmental potential?
> Are the forthcoming changes in designation procedures likely to change
> thanks for any help
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 14/02/2005