Landowner unhappy after discovery

[Son of the sands]

Apparently been left well out of pocket. This is not good news and could put some landowners off allowing access to land if they fear a large bill for "exciting" discoveries.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-39106514

[splodge]

Sheer bloody madness

[lee greagsbey]

Insanity pure and simple.... what's now stopping the next development from saying keep digging or "I didn't see nothing mate" this is not a good thing for the future I am guessing....

[dig-it-pete]

As this is of national interest either the state or the lottery fund should pay - If it had been a hoard of Saxon pennies instead of a hoard of bodies he would know doubt be a very wealthy man As my old Grandad used to say 'The Law is an Ass'

[jcmaloney]

Its a development cost to his business and he hasn`t been asked to fund all of it.
Had he not wanted to expand his business then it would still be a river bank.
Those who say its an excuse for landowners not to give permission are slightly off the page. How many very early AS graveyards turn up as a consequence of detecting finds?

PS: I know the chap who detected this site before and during the excavation.
PPS: With landownership also comes responsibility..... we talk about it often enough.

[Old Git John]

That is appalling, what would they feel if he had just kept quiet about it all, and
left the graves covered up forever ? He died and then a later occupant finds
them, he leaves it, ad hoc.
Either we as a nation want to know about such discoveries, BUT not at cost to
the landowner/farmer. I now understand why one of mine panicked when
I found a silver ring several years ago, because he thought that his livelihood
was at risk. Too bloody right it was. In his case the ring was disclaime
and returned to myself, I in turn returned it to him, as I had the photographs,
and all appropriate reports about it, and believed that if no museum wanted it,
it should remain in his family.
The shear greed which is shown here on the part of those who are supposed to
do all they can to preserve our past history makes one feel that, those who goes
out of their way to abuse every aspect of the Treasure Act has a very tiny point
to make.
What will be the position if said landowner/farmer attempts to bar excavations ?

[jcmaloney]

Its pre-planning conditions that the landowner has to have an assessment done that is either desk based (for areas unlikely to produce anything).... or more field based.
In come geo-phys etc, then trial trench`s then (as in this case) full excavation as his planned work would have destroyed the site. If he was building houses its the same.

"The cemetery was uncovered as part of an excavation funded by Historic England before the development of a fishing lake"
http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/dramatic_di ... _1_4777893

[northern1]

He was developing the land, and as part of the planning process, had archeological investigations carried out. The principal, since 1991, is that the person who destroys the archaeology has to pay for it. I don't think this appeared as a result of detecting; MOLA = Museum of London Archaeology, a commercial archaeological company. Some of the money will be their fees. Timber needs conservation so lots of coffins = lots of work.

[rizla01]

If it were Barratts of Wimpey Etc we would have expected them to stump up the cost as they are all about making money, it doesn't hurt for them to support historic research Etc.
But when it comes down to an innocent individual, that should be treated differently.

Certainly food for thought for any landowner though.
If I wanted to extend my property, I am afraid any such discoveries would remain undiscovered, following this.

[Tracker]

That is appalling, what would they feel if he had just kept quiet about it all, and
left the graves covered up forever ? He died and then a later occupant finds
them, he leaves it, ad hoc.
Either we as a nation want to know about such discoveries, BUT not at cost to
the landowner/farmer. I now understand why one of mine panicked when
I found a silver ring several years ago, because he thought that his livelihood
was at risk. Too bloody right it was. In his case the ring was disclaime
and returned to myself, I in turn returned it to him, as I had the photographs,
and all appropriate reports about it, and believed that if no museum wanted it,
it should remain in his family.
The shear greed which is shown here on the part of those who are supposed to
do all they can to preserve our past history makes one feel that, those who goes
out of their way to abuse every aspect of the Treasure Act has a very tiny point
to make.
What will be the position if said landowner/farmer attempts to bar excavations ?

That is what maybe should happen to the dead, leave them to rest in peace.