On Sat, 23 Sep 1995, Peter Northover wrote:
 
> Perhaps some comments should come from a country where metal detecting is
> largely legal and where, whether we like it or not, an important contribution
> has been made.
>
> The position in England and Wales (not in Scotland or Northern Ireland which
> have different legal systems) is essentially that metal detecting is legal
> provided it is not carried out on a scheduled archaeological site or anceint
> monmument and that the detector suer has the permission of the landowner. With
> the execption of gold and silver, where our creaky Treasure Trove laws apply,
> the finds belong to the landowner. Problems arise here because a farmer could
> be a tenant of some or all of the land and the owner difficult to identify -
> perhaps an insurance company.
>
> That said, in an area where a good relationship between museums, archaeologist
s
> and detectors recording can be of a reasonable standard. The nature of the
> archaeological record in England and Wales means that there are many isolated
> or stray finds, often without context as they are in ploughsoil, and the vital
> piece of data is the exact location of the find spot. A significant number of
> sites is discovered each year by metal detectors and there appears to be one
> class of site which is only discoverable with metal detectors. Some users have
> become experts in their own right in certain classes of material, and one user
> is charting the early Saxon iron industry in Essex by adapting his detector to
> pick up the slag cakes from slag-pit furnaces.
>
> There is, of course, a down side. Sites are looted and wrecked, and there is i
n
> some areas serious under-reporting, especially of coin hoards, and there have
> been activities which are downright criminal. A recent report published by
> English Heritage studies the impact of metal detecting on English archaeology;
> this is recommended reading.
>
> For a personal view, as a specialist in prehistoric metalwork in Britain I hav
e
> had a great deal of benefit form metal detector activity. In particular,
> intensive detecting in limited areas is giving us a much better idea of the
> true survival and distribution of Bronze Age metalwork in the landscape, and o
n
> the foreshore.
>
> Peter Northover
> Dept. of Materials, University of Oxford
> [log in to unmask]
>
> P.S. Never let metal detectors over your spoil heap at the end of an excavatio
n
> - it is just too shaming!
>
 
 
How sad that in much of Britain the uncontrolled collection of metal
objects by looters is considered a kind of ethical hobby (in many places
in the US this is also the case, at least for private lands). If the
"metal detector users" are not recording data about artifact context, how
can one be sure that no meaningful context exists? I have worked in many
plow zones. In most cases the site formation processes of such sites can
be sufficiently controlled that meaningful spatial data can be collected.
 
For those who might be interested, I know a little trick that can help to
slow down such "metal detector activity" when it is being attempted at
archaeological sites.  All you need to do is purchase an assortment of
metal washers and fishing weights. Be sure not to use anything that could
be mistaken for an actual artifact. Simply toss these items over the site
in question. Find a big tree to hide in, and wait until your
metal-detector friends come back. You will have hours of fun as you watch
them discover that their favorite collecting areas are full of "modern
junk" that looks to their instruments like coins. You might also try loads
of tacks (also good for the tires of their cars), or cheap replicas (my
favorites are imitations of famous, known pieces, in base metals, such as
lead). Most looters have extremely limited attention spans, and they will
soon tire, and head for greener pastures. It may also be useful to
encourage treasure stories about non-site areas, especially ones that have
considerable hazards, such as poisonous snakes.
 
Metal detectors are valuable tools that can provide critical data to
archaeology. The remains of the past (especially the distant past) are
simply too precious to be abandoned to looters (that is to say, anyone
who has not been trained to unearth such objects in a controlled,
meaningful manner).
 
Here in San Diego I have had repeated opportunities to interact with the
metal detector crowd. During my life I have seen a few members of this
club turned around. However, most of the ones I have known were
explicit in their contempt for historic preservation. I have physically
driven these individuals from site excavations I have directed. They seem
to delight in carrying large knives and similar weapons. However, they
inevitably run away when the words "law enforcement" come up. The ability
to call the police in quick makes a cell phone an essential item in the
modern archaeologists tool kit. As far as I am concerned, the rewards for
destroying our vanishing historic heritage should be prisons and graves.
 
Perhaps it is time to seek some kind of international law which will
eliminate the hobby of looting, in all its forms. God knows, if something
is not done soon, there may be little left to study.